TV anchor slams mainstream media:"They simply wanted to create a narrative out of thin air and displaying without regard for journalism ethics"
A post of David Nye on Saturday drew the attention of the netizens after defending President Rodrigo Duterte from these sensationalizing news of the mainstream media.
Nye lashed out media men for making it more appear as a cutting of ties based on their terms and unverified interpretation. But what Duterte meant was just 'separation of foreign policy'.
He said nowadays as the number of people grows, it also started to question their credibility and integrity. He said because of the bias reports of the media, he thinks they probably forget the journalism ethics.
Moreover, Nye stated that the separation of foreign policy is not a big deal because this is expected to be an independent country.
As he exclaimed, "So it’s clear Duterte’s decisions are based on practical considerations for the Philippines’ benefit. If anyone has a problem with that, he or she should have his/her head checked."
On the latter part, he cited that if China were 'evil' as what media claim. He questioned them, 'why did the US invite China to joint military exercises, including the massive Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) war games in Hawaii in June?' When in fact, the China are the one who's benefited it most.
Read his full FB post:
Source: David Nye
There they go again.
The mainstream media’s latest favorite loaded term against Duterte is “backtrack.” They’ve started interpreting Duterte’s clarification that he meant “"separation of foreign policy" rather than "a severance of ties" when he declared a separation from the US. His clarification makes sense in the context of what he’s been saying and doing.
But the media won’t have it, and continue to use terms based on their unverified and non-fact-based interpretations. They simply wanted to create a narrative out of thin air—and presumably based on the bias they’ve been clearly displaying without regard for journalism ethics. They figure “we’re big,” “we’re strong,” “people will continue to patronize us.” Fair enough, but by doing so a growing number of people will question your credibility and journalistic integrity as well. The Gallup Organization reported in September that Americans' trust and confidence in the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly" has dropped to its lowest level in Gallup polling history, with 32% saying they have a great deal or fair amount of trust in the media. This is down eight percentage points from last year. How about Filipinos’ faith in mainstream Philippine media? Judging from monickers being thrown out there and the media’s incessant abuse of so-called “anonymous sources” (there are ethical standards as well which sets the bar on when “anonymous sources” can be used in news reports), I would like to think the numbers are pretty low as well, if not lower.
Now that I’ve cleared that point, let’s get back to Duterte’s “separation” clarification. First, pursuing an independent foreign policy is no big deal. It’s what truly independent countries are expected to do. The colonial era is a distant memory and neocolonialism should be taught a lesson. Second, even countries which are cozier to the US—and benefit much more from US aid and other perks like visa-free entry and preferential work permits—have begun to adopt more pragmatic policies which make the US uneasy. Case in point: staunch US allies such as the UK, Germany, France and Italy have decided to join the China-initiated Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) in March. For those of you not familiar with the AIIB, it's an international financial institution that aims to support the building of infrastructure in the Asia-Pacific region.The proposal was first made by the Vice Chairman of the China Center for International Economic Exchanges, a Chinese think tank, at the Bo'ao Forum in April 2009. The initial context was to make better use of Chinese foreign currency reserves in the wake of the global financial crisis.
So it’s clear Duterte’s decisions are based on practical considerations for the Philippines’ benefit. If anyone has a problem with that, he or she should have his/her head checked.
And one last point: if China were as “evil” as media and some closet racist Filipinos make them appear, why did the US invite China to joint military exercises, including the massive Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) war games in Hawaii in June? Is the US adopting the adage, “stay close to your friends, but closer to your enemies?” Because if that’s what they’re thinking, China stands to benefit from those exercises more than the US. So that line of thinking makes no sense.
Source: David Nye