Noynoy Aquino held this morning what he said was his first ever online press conference - by online meaning he was at his Times Street home, we were in a conference room in Makati, and the twain met eye to eye in real time, through (wait for it...) “the magic of the internet”. This chance for direct interaction with the Senator was offered as the opening quarter for what essentially was a conference call between Noynoy's team and some members of the media (including
Howie Severino, Carmela Fonbuena, and
Ellen Tordesillas), staged to preview the Aquino campaign's cyberspace strategy this forthcoming elections. Not being a media professional, I was quite surprised to be there (through the good graces of Gang Badoy and
RockEd Radio, I'm a part of its
Rethink Media Source group). It was my first ever event of this sort, my first ever opportunity to ask questions to a leading presidential candidate, I did have that disorienting experience of realizing mid-sentence that the words I had just uttered made no grammatical sense. But I was less nervous than I should have been, thanks to having learned just before the conference started of the Phoenix Suns' come-from-behind victory over the Sixers. (81-1 baby!)
So the event was divided into two neat halves – Noynoy's mini-press conference (about 15 minutes long), and the preview of the Aquino campaign's online strategy. Those who have adapted the mantra of “platform, platform!” will be more interested in the first half than the second, but let's not give short shrift to the latter. Played out properly, an innovative effort on cyberspace by Noynoy could have the opportunity to change the dynamic of Philippine electoral politics even if his presidency ends up one like the others. In homage to 500 Days of Summer, we'll rebel against linear chronology and make the second part the first part. I'll get to his answers in a while. If you can't bear with me, scroll down.
The Internet is hardly the most pervasive medium in the Philippines – television is, and the Aquino camp concedes that. Still, they hints at staging the first Philippine cyberspace political campaign “that is reality-based”. The resource speaker the Aquino campaign sought for the conference, Donald Lim (CEO of Yehey), observed that the Internet presence preferred thus far by local political candidates has been passive – using the Internet as just another media platform for advertisement. The promise was offered for a more interactive campaign, one where voters had the opportunity to mix with the candidate and her/his team. There were predictable repeat allusions to the Obama campaign, and the level of online engagement utilized by the Democrats in 2008 with their supporters. It is clear that the Aquino camp is looking intensely at the Obama online model for co option to a Philippine setting.
(It remains to be seen though whether Noynoy intends to raise funds online as Obama did.) The campaign has in fact launched a website that facilitates online donations by Filipino citizens
"to support volunteers of Noynoy Aquino".
The promise of an interactive campaign also holds out the promise of an interactive presidency, one where a citizen need only type away on the computer to directly submit grievances to the President and her/his subordinates and expect a prompt response, one where the inner workings of government are demystified online so as to allow for greater interrelation between the leader and the led. Greater interaction leads to greater accountability, avoids the prospect of a President locked up in an ivory tower, and minimizes that psychologically destructive tendency to mistrust our leaders. Any netizen may attest to the level of vitriol in political debate engaged online, with its the copious use of swear words strung together in unprecedented fashion. A politician will find much comfort when banished from the Internet. Yet a candidate who is willing to embrace the Internet rather than shunning it or dealing with it in token fashion will more likely be a leader who is stable enough to face the critics, a leader gracious enough to be responsive to the concerns those citizens she/he leads who did not vote for you, will never vote for you, and maybe even actively despise you. The current presidency is one which has retreated into a bubble inflated by yes men, and it is that cocooning which has secreted it from a current popular mandate. If the Noynoy campaign is able to provide a truly interactive campaign, and correspondingly, an interactive presidency, the model may well take hold to the extent that future candidates who refuse to allow for a similar dynamic will be denied the chance to lead.
The efforts so far by Noynoy's campaign for online interactivity are still in genesis. There is an ongoing
design-an-avatar contest, and a wicked smart “yellow parol” meme to be launched this week that will surely go viral in the Philippines. There are of course the requisite
official website,
Facebook fan page,
Twitter and
Multiply accounts and even still space on
Friendster, although these venues can only offer as much interactivity as their overseas-developed platforms can allow. Most interestingly, the Noynoy camp has engaged a videographer to follow the candidate around and promises a daily vlog (
"60 Seconds With Noy"). We were previewed the first three of these vlogs (the first set is to run from today until November 27), and they were engaging enough, but not much different from the 60-second TV ads we have become accustomed to – none yet of the cinema-verite vlogs
some politicians abroad have taken to.
One more interesting point on the online campaign. The relationship between online campaign activity and our pre-Internet campaign laws (which prohibit campaign activities prior to the official campaign period) remains murky. We were told that upon advise of their lawyers, the Aquino campaign will defer from online interaction with the voters from the time Noynoy files his certificate of candidacy (planned for November 27) until the start of the official campaign period on February 9, 2010. This may lead to the taking offline of the websites they have posted so far, maybe even suspending Facebook and Twitter activity. This prospect would inevitably diminish the interchange of ideas vital to a substantive election campaign, though the solution may require some legislative updating of the Omnibus Election Code. However, one intriguing question given the nature of viral activity is whether a candidate's sympathizer who is not affiliated with the campaign could be held liable for any online advocacy in support of a candidate. The 1992 Supreme Court decision in
Adiong v. COMELEC, which struck down a ban on campaign stickers and decals pasted on vehicles on grounds of free speech, may be cited to bolster the cause of private citizens unaffiliated with candidates but desiring to engage in an online campaign on their own, though it is unclear whether an argument premised on that ruling will succeed.
Noynoy's answers.
The time allotted was sparse, fifteen minutes (we were told he had to attend a meeting). We were told that the Senator was to dwell on the theme of the online campaign, and nobody present was able to wildly deviate from that theme. No questions about Luisita, for example. Noynoy was asked what message he intended to convey with his recent
star-studded network-diverse MTV. In response, he mentioned the need for the country to go back into the light, going back to where we should be, “ibalik ang tama”. That ad was totally alien to my own personal sensibilities, but I didn't mind it that much, knowing that I was not the target market. (After Noynoy went offline, it was mentioned that the MTV was actually a gift to Noynoy from Kris Aquino and Boy Abunda.)
Noynoy was asked on whether he was willing to utilize the Internet to provide greater transparency to his government, such as by posting online Statements of Assets and Liabilities or visitor logs to Malacanang. He replied that he was ready to consider that possibility, even work with Congress for possible remedial legislation to let that happen, but at the same time, do so within reasonable limits to avoid abuses. I sensed he had in mind partisan fishing expeditions.
Then, a question on the right-to-reply bill. Senator Aquino noted that the bill itself on its face was reasonable, that it would provide an antidote for figures victimized by unscrupulous smear campaigns. He alluded to the Holmes dictum that one didn't have the right to falsely shout “fire” in a crowded theater, and the Spidey-like truism that with rights (i.e., free speech) comes responsibilities – a notion that probably goes without saying but at the same time brings up uncomfortable allusions to
Article V of the Marcos Constitution. Still, according to Senator Aquino, he recognized the concerns of the media over the right to reply bill and how it might dictate editorial policy, and said that compromise accommodating these competing concerns would be necessary. When asked whether he supported extending the coverage of the right-to-reply law to bloggers and non-journalists, the Senator reiterated his previous answer, giving me the impression that he did not believe there to be any material distinction between media professionals and other folk when it came to right-to-reply. Then, Ellen Tordesillas commented that a right-to-reply bill had already been voted upon by the Senate, and asked whether Noynoy had voted for or against the bill. Noynoy replied that he could not recall how he voted on the bill, that he would have to check the record on that. He explained that at that time, there had been numerous pressing matters being considered by the Senate, and he did not pay that much attention to right-to-reply as he thought it as “a secondary concern”.
I've written before about
my utter disdain for right-to-reply, so I'll dwell on this issue now. I'm ready to give Senator Aquino the benefit of the doubt that he is unable to recall how he voted on right-to-reply. Even at my age, I tend to forget stuff for which I have little or no passion for. Yet even that possibility is distressing. I understand that right-to-reply is not an issue that puts food on the table, or even one that has resonance with the public at large. Yet the concerns surrounding it are systemic to our democratic way of life and the Constitution that safeguards it. To live under a democracy means not having to second-guess basic interpersonal activities, and talking about other people is an essential part of the primordial human dynamic. The imposition of the right-to-reply requirement, extending as it would to every person in the Philippines, inhibits not just free speech, but free interaction. Some of the complaints that have led to its proposal – i.e., smear campaigns and black propaganda – are already remedied by our laws on slander and libel, the interpretation of which has been aligned by jurisprudence to conform to constitutional standards. I understand the short-term gains, especially this campaign season, that right-to-reply would afford to political candidates, especially those under well-funded partisan coordinated attacks implemented through journalists. Still, there is no legal demand for media to remain bias-free, and even if popular demand swells for legislative implementation of a just-the-facts media culture, the Constitution is compromised.
Is Senator Aquino's views on right-to-reply a deal-breaker for me? Nope. I've conceded that throughout my life, there will be candidates I vote for who hold some views with which I may not agree and I'll live with that since I have no passion or intention for running for office myself. In the case of Noynoy, it matters to me that his political immersion came during the time of totalitarian rule and the democratic corrective that followed – on the right side both times. His instincts, I trust, remain on the side of democratic rights, and his views on right-to-reply may well be a sop to active realities that have impeded him and his political associates. The candidate whom I sort of spoke with today is a comforting presence, now blessed with an easy fluency shorn of the overly-rehearsed cadence that died with William Jennings Bryan. Without need of stagecraft or slogans, I can see him easing into a paternal presence which the Filipino people can favorably respond to. This sort of easy-to-have-a-beer-with dynamic can be dismissed as mere optics, yet interpersonal comfort is integral in building trust. And after the last two administrations, I long for a President I can like and can trust in knowing that she/he will prioritize the national welfare over personal gain.
I still haven't decided whom I'll vote for, even as I'll admit that as of now, my gut is slowly being conditioned into assuming that Noynoy Aquino will be our next President and that I don't mind that prospect. What happened today did not change my basic philosophical attitudes towards the Senator, save for that natural goodwill that occurs after having some pleasant interaction with a person whom you had previously encountered only by reputation. I still want him tested by the crucible of the forthcoming political campaign – facing not evading the critics and enemies, dealing with whatever crisis that may arise. That way, we will get a better sense of how he might govern us and from there, make a more informed choice. Greater interactivity offers a clearer lens into the mind and motives of our prospective leaders, and I am pleased that based on today, the Aquino campaign is ready to provide us with that chance.
Bonus materials: here's Senator Aquino's first vlog, and it is quite appealing.
Posts
