In the recent dawn of the Cyber Crime Law in the
Philippines, there was an outrage on the right to speech and how opinions are
an innate right and the same goes for the ability to voice them out. I, myself,
felt fears that if I let slip an unsavory opinion about a political figure or
celebrity, I could do some jail time for Cyber Libel. Then a friend of mine
who’s a lawyer in Manila defined
libel for me, from which I learned 2 things: an opinion, even if negative in nature,
does not constitute libel, and my misinformation was the source of my fears.
Let’s take one very popular post that flooded over the
internet, the one about the MRT-3 giving very poor service as characterized in
this photo:
Click here
for the full post with necessary justification.
Why is this not libelous? Well, for one, it isn’t satirical
too, but for starters, libel has to submit to 4 conditions. To be libelous, a
statement 1) has be an allegation of a discreditable act, 2) has been
published, 3) identifies the/a person, and 4) has the intent to malign—all of
which must be met with the 4th one being the burden that the
appellant has to prove.
Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary defines satire as “using
humor to show that someone or something is foolish, weak, bad, etc.”. this is
characterized in popular media (the internet, primarily) through news reports
that are not real, funny, and sarcastic in nature. Take the absurd (but
nonetheless funny) news about Kris Aquino’s interview with The Amazing
Spider-Man 2 cast Andrew Garfield. After what the social media has dubbed as an
“unprofessional” interview, a satirical news
report about the movie being cancelled was published, saying that the
director saw that the movie will lose revenue in the Philippines and that the
stars found that there should have been more product placement within the movie
to make it an actual hit.
The thing with satire is that it is an informed opinion in
the form of exacerbated comedy. It can sometimes be allegorical but most of the
time, there is intelligent criticism within the satire and it is for the
consumption of an intended audience. It’s like a Sunday column with the
difference that it is a work of fiction. Further, to make satire, one has to be
responsible and vigilant that one has to have been informed well and is
actually a good humor writer because reasons.
So yeah, if you’re only out to give an informed critique on
the current standing of the government, then by all means, be sardonic and
sarcastic about it on social media (but make it good). If you, however, feel
the need to share your thoughts on a political figure being unable to do
his/her job well because he/she is too engrossed and busy with multiple
partners, laundering money, and is homosexual, then be warned, malicious words
burn you back.
