The Philippine Online Chronicles

Shall we take a trip to take a look at the past four months of campaigning to see where we stand?

The campaign’s opening days

In January, before the opening days of the election, Noynoy Aquino stood before members of the Makati Business Club, and delivered his first policy speech, “A Philippines that Works”.  He was also the first amongst the candidates for president to do so.  He spoke of at least 300B deficit that would greet the next administration.  He talked about how he would turn around that deficit, by going after tax evasion, smuggling, and vowed to raise tax effort by two percent, before even considering raising taxes.  That more than anything, was a subtle signal that this election must be about issues.

On the one hand, Manny Villar saturated that market with his story.  "Manny Villar was poor just like you but he worked hard to get where he was.  With his help, you can rise from poverty too.  I’ve give you houses.  I’ll give you opportunity."  The wowowee crowd took to Manny Villar’s message like ducks to water.

Between November and January, Manny Villar went on advertising blitz from Google Ads to Television ads.   Between November 2009 and January 2010, “Pera at Politika” (Money and Politics) reported that Manny Villar spent over a billion in Ad values. [Pap Cover letter, here.]

The Ad blitz proved quite successful.  Manny Villar closed the gap between himself and his rival, Noynoy Aquino.

At about the same time In January 2010 that Aquino’s speech came out, questions and allegations about Villar’s involvement with C5 came back to haunt the latter like a bad rash that wouldn’t go away.  The senate charged Mr. Villar with ethics violation.  In that one moment in January, Manny Villar could have won the election.

Manny Villar could have stood before his peers, and subjected himself to humiliation and scrutiny.  If he was able to defend himself before them, in front of national television, even in spite of being humiliated, then Villar could have closed in the gap on questions on his integrity. People are smart enough to know if they are being played.

When Villar walked away from that opportunity, it was good tactics.  The C5 allegations were not per se, illegal.  As it has been explained, it was bordering on illegality, it was a matter of ethics, and the latter is very, very salient in this election.  It was what was wrong with the Philippine leadership, a lack of sense of propriety.

For the sake of argument, remove all the conspiracy theories about Villarroyo, and Villar’s actions that day, point that when it is inconvenient, he would simply ignore the issue.  He was very much following in the footsteps of Mrs. Arroyo.

The question of Villar’s integrity is very salient because as Pulse Asia reported, what was important in this election is the choice of candidate who is “not corrupt” and “cares for the poor.”

People expected both.  They are not expecting competence or intelligence.  They want someone who is not corrupt and who cares for the poor.

Villar already proved he cared for the poor.  His Ad blitz, his pro-OFW stance, his socialist platform, and media campaign branded him a populist leader.  He cared for the poor.

On the one hand, Aquino had already proven himself not to be corrupt.  What he needed to prove was that he cared enough for the poor and to answer questions of competency.

Aquino and Villar tied

In February, a seismic event rocked the Aquino Campaign.  It was a demoralizing event.  As the survey revealed, Villar had closed the gap.  The survey was done in the moment C5 was on television.

Was the message wrong?

Didn’t people care about Manny Villar’s credibility?

Didn’t people care that while Villar's party’s platform was socialist, he also distanced himself from it?  There is nothing wrong with being a socialist.  Einstein was one. He wrote Why Socialism. Why can’t Villar and his ilk be true to themselves and be proud of who they are?  That credibility issue would haunt Villar and the NP throughout the rest of the campaign.

Going back to the survey result, what survey says about the LP and NP was a glaring contrast as to how each campaign has handled setback and defeat in this contest.

Slow, the campaign of Aquino may have been, but by February, post survey result, they were getting their act together.  The most glaring issue of the election was a battle between Integrity and Competence.  Better put, the winning candidate would have to have Integrity and needed to prove he was pro-poor.  The Aquino camp retooled its message, “Kung Walang Corrupt, Walang Mahirap.” (If no one stole, there won’t be poor).  It was good rhetoric that addressed what people needed to know about their candidate.

The Liberal Party hunted, devastated chose instead of blaming survey results, to pick up, dusted off and started all over again.  Contrast to the Nacionalista Party’s petulant response.

Is “Kung walang corrupt, walang mahirap,” merely a ‘motherhood statement?’

On Education

In February, Aquino hammered that Education is key.  Ivy Vibar wrote:

“According to Aquino, research and development (R&D), while not at the top of the list, is a priority. However, education is again a factor, as there are only a few students focusing on the sciences.

"It is a question of the chicken and the egg," he said. "Where should we start?"

The country, he noted, should first improve its manufacturing base, so that there will be a demand for the graduates of science-related courses. Jobs focusing on research and development must first be created, then measures such as lowering taxes on equipment must be implemented to support the industry.”

Then Mr. Aquino released his 10 ways to fix basic education in the Philippines.

1. 12 year basic education cycle.
2. Universal pre-schooling for all
3. Madaris education
4. Technical vocational education as alternative to high school senior
5. Every Child a Reader by Grade 1
6. Science and Math Proficiency
7. Assistance to private schools
8. Medium of instruction rationalized
9. Quality textbooks

10.  Covenant with local governments to build more schools

Contrast Gibo Teodoro and the Lakas CMD Galing at Talino platform:

Basic Education Sector Reform

We will invest heavily in the knowledge and education of our young, to make them capable and responsible players in an evolving economy as productive workers or as entrepreneurs. We shall work to close the classroom deficit, reduce the teacher to pupil ration in public schools and support the continuous improvements of all schools, enhance teacher quality, and raise learning outcomes by aligning our curriculum design with those of the rest of the world. We will support the development of educational kits that may be digitally delivered to all public schools to build a uniform base of quality learning for our children. These shall involve adopting competency-based standards for hiring and deployment of teachers, further developing the basic education curriculum linked to desired learning outcomes, a multi-year budget format for basic education, school based management wherein every school would come up with their specific school improvement plans with the active involvement of local stakeholders, among others.

Digitally delivered educational kits.  Is that what we need?

Villar and his past

Questions about Villar’s past continued to hound him.

On March 16, Lila Shahani posted a piece on her blog searching for the source of Manny Villar’s wealth.  She concluded that Villar could very have perjured himself or was money laundering.

More than a month later, Dean dela Paz wrote on April 22, Squidballs and sloppy sorties, which was a rather emotional piece against Ms. Shahani's:

“Intellectual incompetence, no matter how glazed, peppered, or curried is worthless.

This fake audit makes sense only as hollow-point ordnance.”

Manny Villar’s source of wealth to see how exactly he got his wealth is most salient in this election.  He spent over a billion pesos alone between November 2009 and January 2010.

Everyone has already assumed Villar was running, months in advance and yet, has it been mentioned in Mainstream Media?  Did Mainstream Media or New Media attempt a look at Villar’s wealth; to simply assume his word that it was hard work?  We’ve seen how he sidestepped allegations of C5.  Is he hiding something else?  How exactly did he get his money?  Did he do it legitimately?  Can we confirm the story he so brazenly announced in his campaign advertising?

History tells us that people will vote a womanizer, and drunkard and a known gambler.  Mr. Estrada was proud of his accomplishments.  He was pro-poor, and very populist, but people accepted him for who he is: a rich man, who had a lot of women.

Manny Villar does not need to lie about his past.  He was, at best, middle class.  Yes, his initial accomplishments pushed him forward.  Was that evil?

Is it too much to ask to delve deeper into this man's source of wealth?  To see how did he amassed it?  Are we not doing our due diligence by asking questions?

Manny Villar is going to be paid how little again as president?

Which is more incompetent?  People who attempted to answer a question that was glaringly important, or people who sit pontificating about incompetence and didn’t attempt to find out about an important issue that is most salient to our time?

Should we turn a blind eye into allegations that Villar and Chamber of Real Estate and Builders Associations launched an aggressive mortgage financing program and the result was the National Home Finance Mortgage Corporation being bankrupt and stuck will billions of bad home mortgages?

If Aquino’s legislative work is questioned, much more must be asked about Mr. Villar’s business past.  So why is it that for so long people simply ignored finding out where Villar got his billions?

Hacienda Luisita and Land Reform

On the question of Hacienda Luisita, dela Paz wrote:

“Never mind that bullet-riddled cadavers of massacred farmers at Malacanang’s perimeter and the seven slaughtered at Hacienda Luisita are more poignant and eloquent.”

World Socialist Website wrote striking workers were seeking for pay rise, reinstatement of “victimized” workers and a nationwide land redistribution to farm and plantation workers.

Dela Paz failed, like everyone else who choose to look at that one glaring moment in history but fail to put the whole mess that is CARP into its proper historical context. You got to go back and take a look at what’s wrong from the very beginning.  You got to look back at 1985 and how the left became irrelevant.  You got to look back at Mediola Massacre that 18 months into Cory Aquino’s presidency, militant workers rushed the Presidential palace and ended in a violent confrontation.  Would you deal with terrorists?  And fast forward to our time, how many of those landowners gave up, for lack of support?  How many of those violent confrontations were politically motivated and not really about land, because Luisita is well within the law.

You got to take Hacienda Luisita and CARP within its proper context.

Can we change the past?

We can only learn from it.

We can only move forward.

One of the smartest things Gibo Teodoro said in this campaign was his stance on CARP.  He said that CARP should end and that instead of throwing money into the problem, the nation ought to focus that money to help already existing beneficiaries, succeed.

What do the left propose again?  What do those rowdy bunches propose to do about?  What do the misguided people who simply think of bullet-ridden bodies, but can’t solve the big picture?

In the same way people need to talk about the Power crisis.  It isn’t just about power failure.  It has got to include the high cost of electricity in the country.  You got to take into context what has gone before.  You got to see what the economy was in 1980s and the early 1990s, bullet-ridden by the likes of Honasan that robbed what forward step any government could do.

Do you think that any president could have done a better job at negotiating power rates at such a disadvantageous position?

Are we then not accounting for the collapse of ASEAN economies in 1997 and how the economic slow down also meant that the power reserves were unused?

You got to see who has the purse and the purchasing power for new plants and see, how do we help them so we can get the best power price in the years to come?

Like CARP, like Power crisis, people rant and rave, but we need context, we need a holistic understanding of the situation.  We need an even better explanation of the power crisis, and how best to proceed going forward.

Oh, speaking of Power crisis, might I point you to How to read WESM Weakly report for dummies?

On reproductive health

Salient too in this Election, or rather what should have been salient is the talk of Reproductive Health Bill.  Gibo gave up on it because legislation couldn’t be pushed forward.  He argued that the real issues aren’t being heard.  So he gave up talking about it and pulled the plug.   Villar on the other hand said he had his own Health program, which, correct me if I’m wrong hasn’t been published or talked about.  Aquino’s stance on Reproductive Health has been scrutinized.

What did Aquino say?  He wanted parents to be part of the process.  He acknowledges that there is a population problem, but wants parents to be included in the process.  He wants parents to be equally responsible.   He has been talking about that since 2007.  That stance has not changed.

Looking at the state of Reproductive Health in the Philippines, there is without doubt that there needs to be one but the zealousness of the Church’s stance is not in keeping with what they preach.

In Pope John Paul II’s book, “Crossing the Threashold of Hope,” he spoke of reproductive health too in the context of defending women, in the context of love and in the context about the responsibility men have towards the women in society; in the defense of life:

“..in firmly rejecting "pro choice" it is necessary to become courageously "pro woman," promoting a choice that is truly in favor of women. It is precisely the woman, in fact, who pays the highest price, not only for her motherhood, but even more for its destruction, for the suppression of the life of the child who has been conceived. The only honest stance, in these cases, is that of radical solidarity with the woman. It is not right to leave her alone. The experiences of many counseling centers show that the woman does not want to suppress the life of the child she carries within her. If she is supported in this attitude, and if at the same time she is freed from the intimidation of those around her, then she is even capable of heroism. As I have said, numerous counseling centers are witness to this, as are, in a special way, houses for teenage mothers. It seems, therefore, that society is beginning to develop a more mature attitude in this regard, even if there are still many self-styled "benefactors" who claim to "help" women by liberating them from the prospect of motherhood.”

Again, if the pope is infallible, why does the local church have such venomous response to this important issue and why instead of working in concert, in defense of our women, and children why then do we hate them so much?

Why does Pope John Paul II preach, “When love is truly responsible, it is also truly free,” while our Church seem to wall up and run in opposition to the proponents of Reproductive Health instead of constructive engagement?

What then are the stances of Mr. Teodoro and Mr. Villar?

With Gibo Teodoro, he prefers to live to fight another day.

With the ever-conservative Manny Villar, he has spoken about his health plan, but no detail has come to light.  Of the presidential candidates, he will most likely choose to put the RH bill in the backburner.

Which candidate will most likely entertain passage of a version of Reproductive Health in the next congress?

Center for Media and Freedom

The Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility wrote perhaps what is indicative of this election and why issues are not so front and center:

Development/Policy issues were the second most covered election-related theme if the numbers of the three news programs were combined. The candidates’ statements or promises as regards solutions to the current power crisis were the most reported development/policy issue, followed by their platform of government and policy pronouncements on other pressing concerns. (See Table 8.)

In case you were wondering, power crisis was mentioned only 8 times while Platform and policy, 4 times.

It didn’t mention that themes of election related reports numbered 273.  Media spoke a lot about campaign conduct according to the center for media freedom and responsibility, 43 times, as opposed to development or policy issues, at 30 (see table 7).

For all the talk about wanting issues front and center, why didn’t mainstream media talk more about issues?  Why didn’t New Media talk more about issues?

New Media and the Election of 2010

People too talk about black propaganda, of Death Stars and Sith Lords.

We look at questions of Savannah, of C5, of SALN and speak of ammo but fail to ask, if Manny Villar became president shouldn’t questions about whether he cheated, lied, and broke laws to build his empire be answered now, rather than when he’s president when allegations such as that would simply slow down his agenda for the nation?

Don’t you see that?

That if we don’t talk about it now, chances are it would ruin not his presidency but our country’s agenda will once more be sidelined!  We talk about Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and all the questions about ZTN, of Hello Garci, and none of them have closure and here is another, issues about Villar without closure.

We talk about CARP and see bullet-ridden bodies, but not really why those bodies were there in the first place!  Neither do we ask if those people were simply cannon fodder and misguided.

We talk about power crisis, but do not delve at its root cause and neither about why prices are the way they are and how to move forward from here.

This is the discourse of our time.

Quite a number of bloggers and media personalities rant and rave. Many of them choose not to take sides other than their own, for many reasons. They pat themselves in the back and call themselves, distinguished Filipinos.

In spite of their neutrality, did you talk about the issues?  When candidates talked policy, did you agree or disagreed?  Did you delve deep and put our nation in its proper context? Were you simply contrarian for the sake of being contrarian?

Did you even stopped and had a conversation why the candidates’ educational policy was wrong and more importantly, how should it be corrected?

How many of you sided with Isagani Cruz?

How many of you dissected Aquino’s educational policy?

How many of you asked about Villar’s educational policy?

How many of you blogged about Gibo’s educational policy?

How many of you LOL’d at Gordon’s Kindle?

Did you stop and pause and delve deep into why CARP is as it is.  What should or shouldn’t be continued instead of questioning bullet-riddled bodies?

Did you go and research 1985, and what happened to Mendiola in 1988 and did you put those events and CARP and everything else that has happened since into its perspective?

Did you ask where the recipients of CARP now are?

Did they sell the land?

Did they die poor?

Why did they die?

Did you stop and ask how a candidate got so rich, not because you want to put him down, but if he did it right, to be inspired by that achievement and to celebrate it?

Did you delve deep?

Are you merely pontificating?

These distinguished Filipinos are nothing more than shallow voices in the wind, no better than and have the same myopic view that their antithesis have committed themselves to indulge in.  They both pander to their own egos.

Myopic.

We can go on and talk about Internet and broadband in the context of economic development and why it isn’t salient in this campaign.  What’s the point?

Someone is very wrong on the Internet.

On the Philippine experience, Schumey described himself, “an idealist who will not sit idly by while his country is ravaged.”  In my humble opinion, in many ways, it describes every Filipino blogger who has taken a stand.  In their own point of view, they are doing a service.  They put to shame many that pontificate but they allow this country to be ravaged.

Ethics laws bind journalists but bloggers are free to choose their side, because this is about conversation and the audience is free to think and decide for themselves if it is crap they are reading.

New Media is about taking a stand.   It is about discourse and conversation but more than that, New Media must be about learning something new.  That amidst our discussion, we grow, not just intellectually, but as a person, to gain insight, to be better Filipinos.

Whether that stand is pro-Aquino, pro-Villar, or pro-Teodoro, there is something to be respected about standing up and being counted.  Many of you, I’ve locked sabers with on twitter and elsewhere, but know this: I respect you for taking a stand.  However much we disagree, this is a better country because you stood up and fought for your candidate.  You did something.  This is a better democracy and this nation is richer because of you.

Issues front and center

In many ways, the conversation got lost in translation.  Forums asked really shallow questions and rarely challenged candidates.  While the D and E classes would ask for a song and dance, the upper echelons took to forums for their fix.  It wasn’t about issues anymore, or conversation or to listen and to be swayed.  It was about finding chinks in armor.

Everyone wanted glamour; pretty boy Gibo Teodoro is the most glamorous of the bunch, yet delve deeper and you find only shallow waters.  Whether or not he shoots past Villar to finish second in this race would be interesting and what he does with that success, would be salient for 2016.

Erap, well is Erap.  What more can you say about the guy?

Manny Villar’s blog watch moment is probably the most authentic moment for the guy.

Noynoy Aquino’s Makati Business Club speech, “A Philippines that Works”, particularly the open forum will give you the most insight about the man.

The stark reality is that people were looking for two things.  The next president has to be “not corrupt,” and “cares for the poor.”  Those were the only issues that mattered.

For Aquino, he was able to transform his story and as per surveys, he stopped the bleed and held on to the top spot.

For Villar, it was a question of integrity. It was a perception being corrupt that is hurting him.  Hence, good tactic at the beginning to avoid engaging his detractors, but it proved to be a mistake.  It slowed his campaign.  He continued on with the same message, Villar was a poor boy but was he a credible poor boy?  The lack of clear answers to the myriad questions raised against him has resulted in bad strategy.  If Villar loses, it will be because he didn't adapt his message.

The Cusp Online in a brilliant comment to Manolo Quezon’s blog, wrote:

The middle part of the campaign was all about bridging two gaps. There was the competency gap for Aquino, and the credibility gap for Villar. Taken on his own merits, Aquino seemed like a weak candidate, but given the strategy he took in selectively choosing the more reform-minded defectors rather than the transactional ones (who went to Villar), he has been able to build a balanced yet formidable team, while Villar simply tried to evade questions regarding his claims.

As a result, approaching the tailend of the campaign, Aquino is ahead having bridged the competency gap, while Villar’s climb became unsustainable given his inability to bridge the credibility gap. It is beginning to dawn on the electorate now just who is more deserving at this point to take on the reins of power in Malacanang.

At the finish of this campaign, can we say that the reason why issues are not front and center in 2010 is because tired and exhausted, what else is there to talk about that hasn’t been answered?  Who else needs convincing of each candidate’s view?

At the end of this campaign can we say then that the issues are not front and center because the curators in Old Media and New Media refused to make it front and center or did they simply give the audience what they wanted: infotainment?

__

Image is The Thinker. Some rights reserved.

"Duty Calls," by xkcd.  Some rights reserved.