Is ABS-CBN Interactive a legitimate media group?

Philippines - What kind of media outfit is ABS-CBN Interactive? Who is responsible for the news production of this group? What kind of training did they have? Why do they have for their “news,” Eli Soriano facing rape charges as their perpetual feed?

Is news supposed to be like that – that day in day out, the so-called rape case is THE NEWS? As far as readership is concerned – Internet or not - the date attached to the news is part of the news – not foreign to it.

Isn't this an advertisement against Eli Soriano? If it's not, why is it treated as daily fare that never goes away and it is only the date that changes?

Why is the name of Daniel Veridiano, aka Puto, changed to Daniel Pedriano this time, and his alias dropped? Were there second thoughts that perhaps putting the name of this former Ang Dating Daan member, excommunicated for cause by Eli Soriano, will also subject him to public humiliation? Is there hope that finally he knows how to be ashamed?

Despite these changes, and the nature of this piece of “news,” why does Wikipedia attach much credibility to this polluted source? This so-called rape news has become the second paragraph - inserted months ago- in the biopage of Eli Soriano in Wikipedia, if you didn’t know. Puto or Daniel Veridiano used to chair the Happy Christians gay group in Ang Dating Daan before he was excommunicated and afterwards left for the Iglesia ni Cristo, a powerful religious group in the Philippines, and an arc enemy of Eli Soriano's group. Click here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliseo_Soriano

If there is a case filed, does it mean the one charged is guilty? How much of it is truth already that it merits to be placed in an encyclopedia page? Unless proven guilty, one is presumed innocent; therefore a case being filed against somebody is not pertinent to one's story. An enemy can file against you, case after case, but it doesn’t make you already guilty with each case. But why, of all sources, did an encyclopedia honor this? According to Moriori of Wikipedia, it is because Soriano is a controversial figure. Granted, because this man carries with him great understanding of the Bible incomparable to no other man today, the very reason why he gathers enemies from those he tries to correct.

If this is news however, where is the reporter's name that he or she could stand by what was written there? How responsible was the data collection? Was Soriano ever asked about his side? Did the reporter find out about the rape cases filed earlier against Daniel Veridiano by members of Soriano’s group?

How much effort did the reporter exert in knowing about the background of this case, such as that this case was dismissed but re-filed by the Department of Justice through Sec. Raul M. Gonzalez?

Again, if a case is filed, is it open for discussion?
And why are Globe, Touch Mobile, Smart, Talk n' Text, Sun and Addict involved here? How powerful can one get!

If you are a trained writer and you know your structure principles and how news should be treated, you would know right away that this piece of "news" was only intended to ruin somebody. Foremost, it lacks pertinent information and plays with its data.

To add insult to injury, the notice, after the “news” says –
>>>>>
Please refrain from offensive language, slanderous statements and commercial messages.
Discuss this article on our message boards.
http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/storypage.aspx?StoryId=37521

Watch this site – and see how the dark forces of evil do their tricks!
Jane Abao

Note:
10/17/2006 04:34

Today, ABS-CBN Interactive deleted their page about Soriano. It is not there anymore. Wikipedia was duly notified through Moriori about this. However, Wikipedia placed another reference. That shall be treated in another forum.

Writing “News” dated 2008 is not Legitimate Media Work

Original link for the story

Some people take no thought of the news they link. However, not all news sources are credible. It is not enough just to pick up stories and link.

From the titles alone of these so-called news, you could see that they are catchy but misleading. However, these are calculated to be like that - to tickle your mind to read on if you are not careful.

Let's take this link newly posted as an example: “19 Year Old Diebold Technician Wins U.S. Presidency.” This means that the election is over and that this technician has already won. It is misleading, at the same time it appears legitimate. It makes people read on, but one has to have a critical eye.

The source, Avant News, “Tomorrow’s News Today,” is not given credibility by serious people. At most, this news source is a joke. It is only predictive or is making guesses and then writes “news” out of that guess – wild guess, no matter. It is making business out of news, but news that is merely speculative.

In principle, news is a reproduction of an event, hence the element of objectivity. But here, the business is to ride on an imagined future and an imagined news – so there is no objectivity. But there is money, of course.

Angling, you say? Angling does not necessarily mean you move away from what is true. To provide an angle to news means to project one part as the center or focus of your news. However, you do not fabricate the angle. It is already part of the truth that you deal with. You only enlarge it over the others – and yet you do not falsify anything unlike what this 2008 “news” had done.

This one is pure imagination – a fiction using the real name of a real person who is an international figure, just to be able to hinge upon public attention for increased readership.

Check, therefore, what is written in there before you do any linking. If you link these items, you do a great disservice to people who expect legitimate news. Moreover, you encourage the usurpation of true media work.

Read for items like “temporally realigned” – what ever that means – as an equivalent of an excuse or disclaimer when there would be complaints in the future.

Check on the date the news is supposed to have been written. It may be two years later yet.

To illustrate, read this item -

19 Year Old Diebold Technician Wins U.S. Presidency
Temporally realigned by admin on 2006/9/25 10:49:05 (7401 reads)
By Ion Zwitter, Avant News Editor
Washington, D.C., November 5, 2008

Have you noticed the date?

This is not legitimate news. People who do this cash in on entertainment rather than do true media work.

Are terrorists more creative with media?

In a research I’m doing now on al Qaeda and cyber terrorism, there were found to be as many as 5000 websites involved in cyber planning, but about 25 are being watched on a daily basis. The numbers can change everyday but that media products come in the form of poetry, pictures, songs, jokes, cartoons, drawings, stories, symbols that have been profiled for their own campaign. These may have come from true events, pictures, stories, and statements of politicians but were downloaded from the Internet and manipulated or altered and then burned into DVDs and tapes and distributed to recruits, supporters, and sympathizers to fulfill campaign plans.

Upon the testimony of three researchers called contractors from Rand corporation, a poetry or song was used to taunt US soldiers as background music; pictures of events where soldiers were waking away were used to mean defeat; and pictures of female soldiers whose back are turned were made to appear that they are male, taking advantage of Muslim women.

Symbols of the Israel flag with lines up and down were exploited to mean the destiny of grabbing their lands. The name Fatima (symbolizing daughter of Prophet Muhammad) was used as the name of a letter-sender of one being raped in a stockade to force assault and raid on this establishment six days later. The statements of President George Bush and other leaders were used in connection with some events but twisted in context. These and some other similar kinds of products were found in more than 5,000 hostile sites.

Arrogant Big Media

Re: "We The Media: Rise of Citizen Journalism"
Dan Gillmore, OhmyNews (internews)

Arrogance of big media, yes. And they so project dominant or power groups that those marginalized become more marginalized.

In one local media, for example, you often see terms in print media like “Muslim bandits,” “Muslim thief,” “Muslim rapist.” Muslims then feel constrained to complain. Nowhere in media, they say, do you find terms like “Christian bandits,” “Christian thief,” “Christian rapist.” Why is it that when perpetrators are Christians, the adjective fails to act up?

Traditional media more than divide people. They compete to the point that they manufacture news even. No one knows which is true, and yet they thrive with all the advertisements around - which, in turn, do their part to function negatively towards a more helpless society. Kudos to Citizen Journalism!

We The Media: Rise of Citizen Journalism