Two recent events highlight the shortcomings of fact-checking in the Philippines: Meta's decision to remove fact-checking from Facebook and a movie teaser case involving a writ of habeas data. Despite widespread dissemination of misinformation about the writ, fact-checkers have remained silent, while mainstream media has unwittingly amplified the inaccuracies.
There are two seemingly unrelated events that happened in the past two weeks. One is the decision of Mark Zuckerberg to divest his social media platform Meta, which runs Facebook, of its fact-checking features and replace it with community notes.
The other is the brouhaha whipped by a movie teaser that is now the center of a cyberlibel case against the movie's director filed by a popular personality, in addition to a petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas data filed by the latter seeking to stop the director from releasing not only the teaser but also even the entire movie.What is interesting is that while known fact-checkers affiliated with Rappler and Vera Files, as well as in academia, have collectively expressed their disagreement with Meta's move, none of them have come out to fact-check the claim of many that effectively peddles wrong information about the nature of a writ of habeas data. In fact, mainstream media has even propagated the same disinformation.The lie being peddled initially, which was not immediately fact-checked by the fact-checkers who are up in arms against Zuckerberg, is that a regional trial court has allegedly and actually granted the petition and ordered the director to desist from showing the teaser and has technically imposed a hold on the public showing of the yet to be released movie.The writ of habeas data in the Philippines is a legal remedy designed to protect an individual's right to privacy, particularly regarding personal information. It safeguards individuals from the unlawful use, gathering, or disclosure of their personal data by public or private entities. This writ is enshrined in the Rules on the Writ of Habeas Data, promulgated by the Supreme Court on Jan. 22, 2008.The writ protects the constitutional right to privacy and data protection and provides a remedy for individuals whose personal information is collected, used, or stored unlawfully or when such actions threaten their life, liberty, or security. The aggrieved person or any immediate family members or relatives within the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity, if the aggrieved person is unable to file, can file the petition against any person, public official, or private entity that unlawfully gathers, stores, or uses personal information. Key to the petition is that such would threaten the life, liberty, or security of the aggrieved person due to data breaches or misuse.The petition can be filed in any regional trial court (RTC) or appellate court (e.g., the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court) with jurisdiction over the area where the violation occurred or where the petitioner resides. The way it works is that the petitioner files a written petition specifying the details of the unlawful act, the threats to their rights, and the reliefs sought. Upon filing, the court may issue the writ, directing the respondent to provide information regarding the data in question and to explain how it is being processed. A court hearing is then conducted to enable the respondent to justify his or her actions and prove that the collection, storage, or use of personal data complies with lawful and constitutional standards.If the court finds merit in the petition, it can order the deletion, destruction, or correction of the personal data and prevent further unauthorized use of the data. It can also award damages or other appropriate remedies. The court ensures compliance with its orders, and non-compliance may result in contempt proceedings. The writ is often invoked in cases where individuals face harassment, surveillance, or data breaches by law enforcement agencies, private entities, or other individuals. It reinforces accountability and transparency in the handling of personal information. This remedy complements other rights and legal instruments like the writ of amparo and the Data Privacy Act of 2012, promoting a broader framework for privacy and human rights protection in the Philippines.Thus, for anyone in social media, including mainstream media, claiming that the court has already ordered the director to cease and desist from releasing the trailer or the movie is a gross misrepresentation of facts. It is evidence of a massive failure to fact-check. What was ordered by the court was for the director to answer the petition, and a summary hearing to determine the merits of the case is scheduled for tomorrow. What is worse is that some media outlets that pride themselves on being a haven for fact-checking have, in fact, peddled the same disinformation.This is actually the problem of fact-checking, particularly in the Philippines. Fact-checkers appear to be more animated in fact-checking statements from political personalities and social media enablers who make statements that are inconvenient to their obvious political biases.
Please follow us on Google to support us FACT-CHECKING DISINFORMATION PHILIPPINES HABEAS DATA MEDIA
Philippines Latest News, Philippines Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Fact-checking tourism in the PhilippinesSTATISTICAL highlights for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) this year showed that the Philippines was seventh among countries in the region in terms of tourist arrivals. The table below shows that our country recorded 5.45 million tourist arrivals as of Dec.
Read more »
Meta Ditches US Fact-Checking, Embraces Community-Based SystemMeta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and Threads, announced a significant shift in its content moderation strategy, scrapping its US fact-checking program and adopting a community-based system similar to X (formerly Twitter). This change also loosens restrictions on discussions around controversial topics.
Read more »
Meta Ends Third-Party Fact-Checking, Simplifies Content PoliciesMeta, formerly Facebook, announced a significant rollback of its content moderation policies, including the termination of its third-party fact-checking program in the United States. The company will replace fact-checkers with community notes similar to X (formerly Twitter). Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg cited concerns about political bias in fact-checking and a desire to align content policies with 'mainstream discourse'. This move echoes complaints from Republicans and Elon Musk about censorship. Zuckerberg also aims to mend ties with Donald Trump, having donated to his inauguration fund and dined with him at Mar-a-Lago.
Read more »
Meta Ends US Fact-Checking, Sparking Fears of MisinformationMeta's decision to end its US fact-checking program has drawn sharp criticism from disinformation experts who warn that it will lead to an increase in false narratives.
Read more »
Meta Drops US Fact-Checking, Eases Restrictions on Political ContentMeta Platforms has significantly altered its approach to managing political content on its platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, and Threads. The company has discontinued its US fact-checking program and relaxed content moderation on sensitive topics like immigration and gender identity. This move, considered Meta's most substantial shift in handling political discourse, coincides with CEO Mark Zuckerberg's efforts to improve relations with the incoming Trump administration. Meta's recent appointments, including Joel Kaplan as global affairs head and Dana White to its board, further suggest a strategic realignment.
Read more »
Meta Axes US Fact-Checking, Loosens Content Restrictions Ahead of Trump's ReturnMeta Platforms, parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and Threads, has announced the end of its US fact-checking program and relaxed rules on contentious topics like immigration and gender identity. This move, seen as Meta's biggest shift in managing political content, comes amid CEO Mark Zuckerberg's efforts to improve relations with the incoming Trump administration. The decision has been met with approval from President-elect Donald Trump.
Read more »