The title you provided is  "Pro-Duterte Bloggers' Decision to Snub House Hearing Raises Questions on Engagement with Regulatory Efforts"  This title accurately reflects the content of the blog post, which discusses the decision by pro-Duterte bloggers to ignore a House hearing on the issue of disinformation and fake news online. The title effectively conveys the main topic of the blog post and hints at the controversy surrounding the event.  Some possible variations of this title could be   "Pro-Duterte Bloggers Snub House Hearing A Blow to Regulatory Efforts?"  "The Pro-Duterte Blogger Backlash Ignoring the Issue of Disinformation"  "House Hearing on Fake News Pro-Duterte Bloggers Show Up, But Not to Engage"  However, these variations do not quite capture the essence and nuance of the original title.

The title you provided is "Pro-Duterte Bloggers' Decision to Snub House Hearing Raises Questions on Engagement with Regulatory Efforts" This title accurately reflects the content of the blog post, which discusses the decision by pro-Duterte bloggers to ignore a House hearing on the issue of disinformation and fake news online. The title effectively conveys the main topic of the blog post and hints at the controversy surrounding the event. Some possible variations of this title could be "Pro-Duterte Bloggers Snub House Hearing A Blow to Regulatory Efforts?" "The Pro-Duterte Blogger Backlash Ignoring the Issue of Disinformation" "House Hearing on Fake News Pro-Duterte Bloggers Show Up, But Not to Engage" However, these variations do not quite capture the essence and nuance of the original title.

The title you provided is "Pro-Duterte Bloggers' Decision to Snub House Hearing Raises Questions on Engagement with Regulatory Efforts" This title accurately reflects the content of the blog post, which discusses the decision by pro-Duterte bloggers to ignore a House hearing on the issue of disinformation and fake news online. The title effectively conveys the main topic of the blog post and hints at the controversy surrounding the event. Some possible variations of this title could be "Pro-Duterte Bloggers Snub House Hearing A Blow to Regulatory Efforts?" "The Pro-Duterte Blogger Backlash Ignoring the Issue of Disinformation" "House Hearing on Fake News Pro-Duterte Bloggers Show Up, But Not to Engage" However, these variations do not quite capture the essence and nuance of the original title.



Title Pro-Duterte Bloggers' Decision to Snub House Hearing Raises Questions on Engagement with Regulatory Efforts

As the Philippines continues to grapple with the issue of disinformation and fake news online, a group of pro-Duterte bloggers has drawn attention for their decision to ignore a House hearing on the matter. The hearing, conducted by the House Committees on Public Order and Safety, Information and Communications Technology, and Public Information, aimed to explore potential regulatory measures to curb misinformation on social media platforms.

Despite being invited to attend the hearing, only three out of approximately 40 social media figures showed up. Notable among those who skipped the hearing were former National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict officials Lorraine Badoy and Jeffrey Celis, actress Vivian Velez, former broadcaster Jay Sonza, bloggers Sass Sasot, Jun Abines, Mark Anthony Lopez, Lord Byron Cristobal (Banat By), and Krizette Chu.

Cruz-Angeles, a lawyer and former chief of the Presidential Communications Operations Office, even went so far as to reject the committee invitation outright, calling the inquiry unconstitutional. Her response was criticized by Abang Lingkod Party-list Rep. Joseph Stephen Paduano, who stated that it blatantly disregarded Congress' authority.

Despite the controversy surrounding the hearing's turnout, the event did feature some notable highlights. Rachel Khan, a professor of journalism at the University of the Philippines and co-founder of Tsek.ph, shared her policy analysis and recommendations for combating fake news online. Malou Tiquia, a columnist for The Manila Times, also testified before the panel, advocating for Congress to ban the use of troll armies.

The hearing ultimately resulted in show cause orders being issued against Cruz-Angeles and several social media supporters of former president Rodrigo Duterte who failed to attend. As the issue continues to evolve, it remains to be seen how this controversy will play out in the coming weeks and months.

Takeaway The snubbing of a House hearing by pro-Duterte bloggers has raised questions about their willingness to engage with regulatory efforts aimed at combating disinformation online. It is essential for stakeholders to engage in constructive dialogue and explore potential solutions that balance the need to combat fake news with protecting fundamental rights.

Call to Action What are your thoughts on the snubbing of a House hearing by pro-Duterte bloggers? Share your opinions and insights in the comments below!


Avatar

Edward Lance Lorilla

CEO / Co-Founder

Enjoy the little things in life. For one day, you may look back and realize they were the big things. Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up.

Cookie
We care about your data and would love to use cookies to improve your experience.