tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post8923848333318033630..comments2023-06-10T20:22:01.348+08:00Comments on The Society of Honor by Joe America: Libel and Onion SkinThe Society of Honorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02536906267332687130noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post-33937423256184594112012-09-23T06:12:58.984+08:002012-09-23T06:12:58.984+08:00onion skinnedness, ha. Yes, hypersensitivity, too....onion skinnedness, ha. Yes, hypersensitivity, too. Your outline makes excellent sense. If we had a committee and could act on it, I'd vote for it.The Society of Honorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02536906267332687130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post-9834224850768366132012-09-23T05:22:51.784+08:002012-09-23T05:22:51.784+08:00i agree with you that onion skinnedness (?) is a p...i agree with you that onion skinnedness (?) is a problem, which can overload our already overloaded courts.<br /><br />in angela's blog, i put forth the following solution, while keeping libel as an offense (but not a "crime").<br /><br />1) delay all penalties until after the SC (or some higher court decides)<br />2) make the malice standard a national standard, not a local standard. hence. local judges have to weigh the offense against some common, higher standard.<br /><br />let me now add another:<br />3) decriminalize libel, but replace it with higher monetary penalties proportional to actual harm done.GabbyDnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post-81361821515819249672012-09-23T04:17:43.099+08:002012-09-23T04:17:43.099+08:00Yes, you see it, I see it, most everyone sees it, ...Yes, you see it, I see it, most everyone sees it, the legislators don't. Weird, eh? It is astounding that the PRINCIPLE of freedom of expression escapes our leaders. They have to include intimidation in a law dealing mainly with sex.The Society of Honorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02536906267332687130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post-49748482021282604002012-09-22T21:30:16.110+08:002012-09-22T21:30:16.110+08:00Cybercrime law is necessary. Libel and forced lock...Cybercrime law is necessary. Libel and forced lockdown included in current law unnecessarily.<br /><br />Johnny LinAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post-57487947198788600182012-09-22T20:54:29.927+08:002012-09-22T20:54:29.927+08:00Yes, I agree with that, acts are better than words...Yes, I agree with that, acts are better than words, but I think slogans are rather a part of the path to real solutions. I'd rather hear them than the silence you voiced concern about.The Society of Honorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02536906267332687130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post-12031512613625192792012-09-22T20:11:55.151+08:002012-09-22T20:11:55.151+08:00In every problem, there are cosmetic solutions and...In every problem, there are cosmetic solutions and there are real solutions. Keeping pressure on requires focusing on real measures and not "for show" responses. The "Freedom of Information" act is a real solution - when information is made public, people can look, read, analyze and examine - libel becomes irrelevant. In these terms, the signing of the CyberCrimes Act and non passing of Freedom of Information show us vividly what is wrong. Claiming a straight path is a slogan, a cosmetic. Passing and signing a law that actually helps achieve that is a real solution. No praises for cosmetic solutions - to me, that is what meant by keeping the pressure on.acdedioshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05754180388918647081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post-80257915626927359442012-09-22T19:28:50.560+08:002012-09-22T19:28:50.560+08:00Yes, but I see no solutions but to keep the pressu...Yes, but I see no solutions but to keep the pressure on. You start to see cracks now and then, as Senator Santiago admits plagiarism is a crime and President Aquino is forced to explain why he does the things he does. The oligarchs have been a problem since Aguinaldo ruled the roost. What do you suggest as an alternative? I see the Philippines emerging from the dark and a part of the reason is public demands for accountability. I don't see that letting up. The Society of Honorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02536906267332687130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post-83805875118037999602012-09-22T18:52:25.776+08:002012-09-22T18:52:25.776+08:00Free speech empowers. The internet is supposedly a...Free speech empowers. The internet is supposedly an enabler. <br /><br />Yet, what happens in a oligarchic society where power resides in a few hands, the medium sometimes only enables only those who are already in power. Presently, this is highlighted by the fact that online libel became a law while a Freedom of Information Act remains a bill.acdedioshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05754180388918647081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post-88484482699726345482012-09-22T18:26:45.025+08:002012-09-22T18:26:45.025+08:00Yes, and for the Philippines to break out as a pro...Yes, and for the Philippines to break out as a progressive nation, it needs strong voices. I do think that the electronic media of twitter, facebook, blogging and even text messaging represent an aggregate voice that was not so loud even 5 years ago, and will become even louder in the future. So I think, if some voices fall off, silent, there are a lot more to emerge. And the bold will not be quieted.The Society of Honorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02536906267332687130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post-29095374816273303262012-09-22T17:58:36.656+08:002012-09-22T17:58:36.656+08:00The threat of libel (especially in how the Philipp...The threat of libel (especially in how the Philippines defines it) cannot be gauged in tangible terms. Silence is absence. And unfortunately, what does not come out is never seen. Its damage to free speech and expression not only manifests in cases that have been prosecuted but more insidiously, in free speech that we have no opportunity to read or hear. The threat is enough to damage free speech. Even if the cybercrime unit that is created does not actively pursue libel cases, it does not make the threat disappear. Its silencing effect will always be there and we will never really know what was silenced - losing something we never had is always difficult to tell.acdedioshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05754180388918647081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post-91602605231807175902012-09-22T15:40:21.533+08:002012-09-22T15:40:21.533+08:00Ahahahaha, what a beautiful portrait of that event...Ahahahaha, what a beautiful portrait of that event! They are both about the same age, too. The Society of Honorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02536906267332687130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post-29982913401142071552012-09-22T15:38:23.644+08:002012-09-22T15:38:23.644+08:00Again, you seem to ask the tough questions. My obj...Again, you seem to ask the tough questions. My objection is one of many from journalists and attorneys and human rights organizations opposed to the libel provision. The libel provision is 180 degrees opposite the drive for transparency and openness reflected in the Freedom of Information bill stalled in the legislature.<br /><br />Because of the outcry, I think the outcome will be that the cybercrime unit responsible for implementing the rules will not go out and look for libel cases, and will be very cautious in responding to complaints. And when a complaint is lodged, it had better be something other than an opinion or a verbal taunt. It had better be real damages. The something concrete you mention.<br /><br />So I agree with you. But, in the absence of the noise from the people, thugs might feel more inclined to use the provision to quiet those with whom they disagree, as has Senator Sotto with his strange threats against bloggers. I hope that, as distasteful as the libel provision is, to intimidate those who speak out, it will be pretty much uneventful. Unless the provision is challenged in court and done away with, on principle now or when a case arises.<br /><br />That depends a lot on how those with thin skin, like Senator Sotto, react to the loud complaints being made. The point of my article. There are a lot of thin skins about.<br /><br />I don't think bloggers or journalists will materially change what they do. And the loud noise they are making helps assure that is so. The Society of Honorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02536906267332687130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post-91228085230495234702012-09-22T15:22:45.125+08:002012-09-22T15:22:45.125+08:00Joe,
When Trillanes walked out while Enrile was t...Joe,<br /><br />When Trillanes walked out while Enrile was talking, Enrile looked like Eastwood talking to an empty chair! HA HA HA HA HAandrew limhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01930606943449452056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post-41234371810126596642012-09-22T14:40:44.483+08:002012-09-22T14:40:44.483+08:00i have zero objections to this. but:
..."Put...i have zero objections to this. but:<br /><br />..."Put the legal tool of "libel' on the table in a culture of onion skin and suddenly the democratic premises of lawful protest and free speech stand at risk. "<br /><br />why? i think part of your point is: "Look at the result. Actual injury. "<br /><br />isnt that the purpose of a trial? of the judicial system? to determine if there is actual injury, malice, ... and all the other elements are present?<br /><br />look at this another way: everyone has been complaining that libel is a tool to prevent people from making criticisms against public figures.<br /><br />fine. question: did that actually happen? did it prevent anything? we know alot about the accusations against the FG right? did libel stop journalists from doing their jobs? <br /><br />to make the argument work, you have to point to something concrete -- what did libel actually do to prevent journalists from doing their jobs?GabbyDnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4855856123871700301.post-59259092230886836462012-09-22T09:22:00.024+08:002012-09-22T09:22:00.024+08:00They say one has to separate a piece of banana fro...They say one has to separate a piece of banana from the bunch to delay rot. Libel implementing rules and regulations should synchronized with other bills on libel decriminalization. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com