Right of reply bill to cover bloggers

[cliff_drew]

---

MANILA, Philippines--The controversial right of reply bill will not only affect print and broadcast media, but could lead to Internet censorship since it also covers bloggers, “texters” and even iPod users, a party-list lawmaker warned Saturday.

Kabataan party-list Rep. Mong Palatino said the bill’s sponsor in the House, Manila Rep. Bienvenido Abante, admitted during interpellation that House Bill No. 3306 also covers websites, e-mails, Internet social networking sites and other electronic devices in its scope.

Palatino noted that Section 1 of HB 3306 states, “All persons, natural or judicial, who are accused directly or indirectly of committing, having committed, or are criticized by innuendo, suggestion or rumor for any lapse in behavior in public or private life shall have the right to reply to charges or criticisms published in newspapers, magazines, newsletters or publications circulated commercially or for free, or aired or broadcast over radio, television, websites or through any electronic device.”

“The bill, therefore, would not only affect media outfits and journalists but also all website owners, website masters, e-mail account holders and other netizens who are not necessarily media practitioners,” said Palatino who has been a blogger since 2004.

He said the bill would affect “the more than five million bloggers and millions more of Internet users in the country.”

“My fear is that when this bill comes to law, it will be used to regulate the content of the Internet, when we are checking our e-mails, when we open our Friendster or Facebook accounts, when we are checking our websites. Does this mean that we will be compelled to moderate, modify or edit our personal websites? Is this not Internet censorship and suppression of freedom of speech and expression?” Palatino said.

“Does this mean that whenever a criticism is published in these venues a person can use the Right of Reply to compel a blogger or moderator of a social networking site to publish a space or a reply for that person? Or when an individual decides to copy or repost an article from a news website in his or her personal blog, and in the future the said article becomes a subject of this Right of Reply, will he or she be sanctioned or fined also?” he said.

In reply, Abante said the bill would be defined more clearly through its implementing rules and regulations (IRR).

“Primarily, this bill refers to media publications and practitioners. I would think it will be defined more on the IRR,” he said.

But Palatino said that Congress should just remove the line “any electronic device” in the bill’s first section. The bill is still up for amendments in the House.

“Again, this would affect more than 60 million mobile phone users and iPod owners in the country,” Palatino said.

Palatino said he would oppose the right of reply bill on the grounds that it violates the freedom of the press and the public’s freedom of speech and expression. He also said he was not amenable even to a “watered down” version of the bill because it merely “renders the Right of Reply pointless.”

He also encouraged bloggers, netizens, texters and concerned youth to register their opposition to the “apparent railroading of the bill in Congress.”

Source: Inquirer.net

[mannyamador]

I suppose they need to fine-tune this Bill.

Take note, however, that most blogging sites and software already allow for comments. FaceBook and Multiply have similar capabilities. This could be construed as complying with the right-of-reply requirement.

[gargoyle]

I suppose they need to fine-tune this Bill.

Take note, however, that most blogging sites and software already allow for comments. FaceBook and Multiply have similar capabilities. This could be construed as complying with the right-of-reply requirement.

i agree...

i think this is intended against defamation, libel, trial by publicity and/or politically motivated allegations...




Senate Bill No. 2150

AN ACT GRANTING THE RIGHT OF REPLY AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION THEREOF

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. Right of Reply. -All persons natural or juridical who are accused directly or indirectly of committing or having committed or of intending to commit any crime or offense defined by law or are criticized by innuendo, suggestion or rumor for any lapse in behavior in public or private life shall have the right to reply to the charges published or printed in newspapers, magazines, newsletters or publications circulated commercially or for free, or to criticisms aired or broadcast over radio, television, websites, or through any electronic device.

SEC. 2. Where Reply Published. -The reply of the person so accused or criticized shall be published in the same space of the newspapers, magazine, newsletter or publication or aired over the same program on radio, television, website, or any electronic device concerned.

SEC. 3. When Published. -The reply shall be published or broadcast not later than three (3) days after the reply shall have been delivered to the editorial office of the publication concerned or to the station that carried the broadcast being replied to.

SEC. 4. Length of Reply. -The reply shall not be longer than the accusation or criticism as published or broadcast.

SEC. 5. Free of Charge. -The publication or broadcast of the reply shall be free of charge, payment or fees.

SEC. 6. Editing Reply. -The reply as such shall be published or broadcast except for libelous allegations.

SEC. 7. Penalties. -The editor-in-chief, the publisher or station manager, or owner of the broadcast medium who fails or refuses to publish or broadcast the reply as mandated in the preceding section shall be fined in an amount not exceeding Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) for the first offense; Twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00)for the second offense; and Thirty thousand pesos (P30,0000.00) for the third offense.

Thereafter, for repeated failures or refusals to publish or broadcast the reply as mandated herein, a fine of Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00)shall be imposed. Moreover, if the offender is a public official, he shall be subject to administrative liability under existing Civil Service laws.

The court may also recommend that proper sanctions be imposed by any appropriate mass media organizations on erring editors-in-chief, publishers, station managers or owners of media concerned.

SEC. 8. Self-Regulation. - The block-timers who also fail to broadcast or publish the reply shall be subject to the Code of Ethics or to the realm of self-regulation of the network or station.

SEC. 9. Other Remedies. - The publication of the reply does not preclude recourse to other rights or remedies available to the party or parties concerned.

SEC. 10. Sunset Clause. -This Act shall lapse seven (7) years after its approval unless Congress shall provide otherwise.

SEC. 11. Effectivity. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days following its publication in three (3) newspapers of general circulation.

———————

Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session

House Bill No. 3306

AN ACT GRANTING THE RIGHT OF REPLY AND PROVIDING PENALTIES IN VIOLATION THEREOF

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. Right of Reply - All persons natural or juridical who are accused directly or indirectly of committing, having committed, or of intending to commit any crime or offense defined by law; or are criticized by innuendo, suggestion or rumor for any lapse in behavior in public or private life shall have the right to reply to charges or criticisms published or printed in newspapers, magazines, newsletters or publications circulated commercially or for free, or aired or broadcast over radio, television, websites, or through any electronic device.

SEC. 2. Where Reply is Published or Broadcast-The reply of the person so accused or criticized shall be published or broadcast in the same space of the newspapers, magazine, newsletter or publication or aired over the same program on radio, television, website, or through any electronic device.

SEC. 3. When Reply is Published or Broadcast - The reply of the accused or criticized shall be published or broadcast not later than one day after the reply
shall have been delivered to the editorial office of the publication concerned or to the station that carried the broadcast being replied to.

SEC. 4. Obligation to Publish or Broadcast News Item - When an accused who was featured in news stories in radio, broadcast, and/or print media is eventually cleared of the crime or crimes alluded to him, it is the obligation of the same publication or broadcast network to correct its previous report by publishing or broadcasting the findings of the court or police authorities to restore honor and integrity to his person.

SEC. 5. Length of Reply - The reply shall not be longer than the accusation or criticism as published or broadcast.

SEC. 6. Free of Charge - The publication or broadcasting of the reply shall be free of charge, payment or fees.

SEC. 7. Penalties - The publisher and editor-in-chief of the publication or the owner and station manager of the broadcast medium who fails or refuses to publish or broadcast the reply or the correction of an erroneous news item as mandated in this Act shall be fined an amount not exceeding P10.000.00 for the first offense; P30.000 for the second offense; P50.000 and imprisonment for not more than 30 days for the third offense; P100,000 and imprisonment for not more than 30 days for the fourth offense; and P200.000, imprisonment for not more than 30 days and the closure and suspension of the franchise of the publication or broadcast media outlet or station for 30 days for the fifth and succeeding offenses.

SEC. 8. The publication of the reply or correction does not preclude recourse to the exercise of other legal rights and remedies available to the party or
parties concerned.

SEC. 9. Effectivity- This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in at least two (2) newspapers of national circulation.

[Hellblazer 2.1]

has this been effectively enforced?

[leurs]

^its still a bill not a law yet.

[mannyamador]

I wonder HOW they would enforce it if it were interpreted to include blogs and social networking sites too.

[rodsky]

Let me guess...so in the case of virtual worlds like Second Life, Blue Mars or World of Warcraft, they're going to send in "virtual policemen" to monitor and hunt down people who might have "lapses in behavior" in these environments as well...

...MWAHAHAHAHA !!!!!!

*grabs popcorn and waits for the virtua cops and readies his orbit glove, snicker*

-RODION

[mannyamador]

That would be an interesting way of "enforcement"!

[haiasi]

They can't even enforce many existing laws, how much more in internet realm.

[giddyboy]

Nograles threatens ABS-CBN with libel

HOUSE Speaker Prospero Nograles threatened television network ABS-CBN Davao of libel charges if they refuse to retract their story last week that claimed tomatoes were thrown at his congressional office during a protest against Constituent Assembly (Con-Ass) last June 10.

"ABS-CBN TV and radio reported that tomatoes were thrown in my office or my residence. Now they show videos of tomatoes thrown in the street. That's not factual. You see how biased and twisted reporting of the press here because they are under the payroll?" Nograles claimed.

He said he had given enough time for ABS-CBN Davao to "rectify its mistake."

...Nograles said he will also be pushing for the passage of the controversial Right of Reply Bill in the Lower House after his experience with ABS-CBN Davao...

..."That's one of the reasons why the right to reply bill is getting so much support from House members because of the twists and shout reporting of TV networks like these people in ABS-CBN Davao who are so politically biased. Now I have reason to pass it. Personal experience," Nograles said.

full story:
Nograles threatens ABS-CBN with libel | Sun.Star Network Online