I don’t have the habit of nitpicking on how the Manila broadsheets package their news but the PDI story on self-styled hit man Edgar Matobato last week struck me as an ill-conceived attempt bordering on desperation of spiting President Duterte.
Nope, this is not to align myself with the Philippine president who, for all I know, may not even know me from Adam.
But it does not take 35-year veteran in the trade to spot a ‘spite’ article if there is one. First, the story was timed on January 4, just days after the New Year. The message, coming only from devious minds, is clear: expect more of the kind Mr. President.
It is in itself a ‘declaration of war’ against Mr. Duterte, whatever it takes. Is there any link probably to the following account, courtesy of social media?
“LOS ANGELES — A Loida Nicolas Lewis-inspired group of Filipino-Americans met in San Francisco, California, USA with a get-together December 22, 2016 at the residence of Atty. Rodel Rodis in San Francisco, California which was attended by Loida Nicolas-Lewis, Inquirer columnist Randy David, Inquirer reporter Benjamin Pimentel, Greg Macabenta, Inquirer columnists Atty. Ted Laguatan and Atty. Rodel Rodis, who hosted the party.
It was also during this gathering that the group launched Filipino Americans for Human Rights Alliance (FAHRA), another lobby group in Loida Nicolas Lewis’ campaign to oust democratically-elected Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte.
From the looks of it all, the Inquirer is leading the oust Duterte campaign in the U.S. with the help of Lewis and her network of connections in the news.”
In that story, Matobato was reported as claiming that he personally witnessed then Mayor Rodrigo R. Dutertes gun down eight people on separate occasions between 1998 and 2000.
Included in the figure was the killing of National Bureau of Investigation agent who was slain in 1994.
The account was a rambling of the supposed events where several individuals were supposed to have been killed. There was no mention of exact names and dates as to authenticate the supposed killings.
While the PDI hastened to add that it could not independently confirm Matobato’s allegations, still it went at length to treat the ‘package of allegations” as exclusive headline stuff. To lend authenticity and to spice up the story, it included a pair of photos of the self-styled hit man.
Of course, it was not the first time that Matobato’s accounts were ventilated in public. We saw him first months ago for several days at the Senate when he tried in vain to place Mr. Duterte at the scene of the supposed killings.
But inconsistencies and discrepancies in his testimony only exposed his presence as a desperate ploy to embarrass Mr. Duterte. In the end, probably more piqued than amused, the Senate eventually showed him the door and made it clear he could not be granted the protection he sought.
In newspaper parlance, the Senate did not find him a credible source of information. In fact, any Tom, Dick and Harry who managed to soak up on the headlines of local newspapers from the 1990s to 2000 could have come up with the same information.
My theory is that after pestering its Mindanao bureau for stories on the EJK only to come out empty-handed, the PDI desk (at the bidding of management) was constrained to come up with the story to open the ball in a manner of saying.
Tried as it did, it had only Matobato and his fantastic claims to latch on to. The result is a story that is not only poorly-done but was lacking in pertinent details so as to be credible and believable.
Exclusive as the story supposedly was, it did not indeed reveal anything new to raise concern. In the end, one desk editor managed to place the addendum that it “could not confirm Matobato’s allegations with independent sources” to lend a semblance of professionalism.
What to make out of this piece of gutter journalism? The PDI is out there in the forefront and aligned with those out to stoke opposition to the Mr. Duterte’s administration.
Its only predicament is that in so far as the supposed EJKs are concerned, it had only one discredited senator and a self-styled pistolero to anchor its “exclusive” version of accounts.
Meanwhile, there is no arguing with the public trust rating of Mr. Duterte that stood at 83% trusting his leadership based on the latest survey of Pulse Asia. PDI methinks will still use this story, but not with the same prominence it provided Matobato.
That is the other predicament that continues to stomp PDI no end. But having opened the ball, it too must dance with the music. (JKL)
