Nothing Fancy
They say the quality of education’s been going down for the past couple of years, but maybe the analysts have got it wrong. Immediately after Pacquiao’s controversial boxing victory and while the Arroyos’ flight attempt unfolded, millions of Filipinos have suddenly become boxing analysts and legal experts—sometimes, even both.
A cacophony of voices: some of them with thoughtful, valid points for discussion, others with unintelligible bashing, an overuse of exclamation points, or a homage to the demise of properly used English—social media was bursting full with it. But the status updates and tweets betrayed a shallow understanding of the issue at hand, and were more of quick reactions as a way to jump into the discussion. Simply put, not all of them knew what they were talking about—as one online meme goes, “You’re not smart; you just have Internet.”
This latest issue with the Arroyos has made everyone with an Internet connection and a guarantee of anonymity the judge and the jury of the embattled former president. Some praise Arroyo’s arrest as a case of justice served; others see the complicated legal mess that might follow soon afterwards. The truth is that the Arroyo case was never a simple matter to begin with. It’s the Department of Justice vs. the Supreme Court, her constitutional guaranteed right to travel vs. the government’s fear of her slipping away for refuge. What we have here is a show of force, of power, of dominance on one side, and a show to achieve public sympathy, or anger, or disappointment on another. A trial by publicity, a weighing of legality versus morality—all these, issues too complicated to be expressed in 140 characters or less.
In a recent interview for the Philippine Star, veteran journalist Maria Ressa saw social media for the double-edged sword that it is: a medium for spreading fear and a medium for countering it. In social media, everyone is a journalist. What is left now for professional media outlets is to offer analysis and context, “the ability to encapsulate the story.”
I believe in the power of words and in the freedom of speech; I believe in defending one’s right to say what he or she wills, regardless of my acceptance or rejection of his or her opinions. But I believe, most of all, in an informed opinion. To take precaution before publishing one’s thoughts is not a demand for censorship, but a humble recognition of one’s responsibility for the information that he or she chooses to disseminate. The right words can make or break governments, challenge the status quo, or start concrete steps for change. These words must count.
Whether it’s about a national issue or an issue of national pride, any reaction should never come unaccompanied by an understanding of the little details. It’s never just “what you see is what you get.” Behind new stories are historical processes and determinate factors that explain what has led to the present situation; these are the crucial game-changers one needs for understanding the issues.
A culture of reacting without thought and substance is a culture that’s bound to stay trapped in a cycle of mindless, shallow mediocrity.
