Crying wolf?

Manolo Quezon refers readers to counters a recent post by Sassy Lawyer, which holds a different view about the legal threat the PCIJ now faces. Sassy’s lead sums up her view succinctly:

For those who e-mailed about the “threatened” issuance of a search warrant against PCIJ, I have this to say: it is premature to raise hell.

A commenter seconded Sassy, saying the controversy brought to mind the fable of the boy who cried wolf.

Fair enough, I should think. If, as Borges wrote, every writer creates his own precursors, every reader can discover in the given text his own allusions. But the real question is: When is the right time to raise hell? And did the PCIJ, in fact, raise hell?

Both Sheila Coronel and PCIJ’s counsel (disconcertingly enough, also surnamed Coronel) reported the unusual circumstances behind the attempt to source a search warrant against the PCIJ. The circumstances form part of a pattern; to miss the pattern is to refuse to see the evidence of our own eyes. Were they wrong in relating the facts to and expressing their fears before a Senate committee?

Besides, when is the right time to ask for help? Should the PCIJ have waited for the police to knock on their doors, before telling the public what they had found out days before? Perhaps Sassy Lawyer’s legalistic, or shall we say even literalist, view, assumes — wrongly, I think — that media organizations like the PCIJ have a lot of room for legal maneuver. Like other journalists now in the administration’s crosshairs, they did not, and still do not, have the luxury of time.



Filed under Readings in Media, Readings in Politics

16 responses to “Crying wolf?

  1. manuelbuencamino

    Well Sassy is a Manila Standard columnist. And as Manolo said, she earned it

  2. i am being quoted out of context!

  3. Ive seen how the woman resonates her way, she is an island. Actually an ambitious one who would want a piece for a mere recognition and popularity. But like every island, she will have her own storm one day…

  4. My apologies, Manolo. I did not mean to suggest that you shared Sassy’s views. I thought the specific link to your post (instead of to your blog) would suffice, but reading my post now, I see I did not do enough. I should have included a qualifying phrase, or even a quote. Mea culpa!

  5. Also, someone pointed out to me that Sandra Marie Coronel is actually Sheila’s sister. Yup. Guess my “disconcerting” joke fell flat.

  6. no problem, just careful not to seem on the side of those who want to wait until the gestapo comes knocking at the door.

  7. mlq3, i have a dificulty posting in your blog,i dont what aspect of technical problem but just want to let you know, that i am much willing in joining the thread…

  8. edited;

    mlq3, i have a dificulty posting in your blog,i dont know what aspect of technical problem it was but just want to let you know, that i am much willing in joining the thread…

  9. nope, that wasn’t sheila’s sister. sandra marie olaso just happened to marry a coronel. i don’t know whether her husband is related to sheila.

  10. I stand corrected! A (sly) joke that was neither sly nor funny; an assumption that wasn’t true. Plus taking Manolo’s link out of context. That’s three mistakes, at least. Maybe I really shouldn’t write when it’s presstime : )

  11. well, you’re in very good company. the PDI editorial today makes the same mistake.

  12. DJB

    Apathy is the consolation the middle class awards itself when it has not fallen lower and maintains a fair shot at rising higher. But only the Aristocracy cares about the eternal principles.

    PCIJ and its blog are in a different class of blog now. They are “canaries in the mine shaft” and bear watching by all of bloggerdom.

    I hope that Gonzalez does charge pcij with something for posting the Garci tapes. That will force him to use the tapes themselves as “evidence” of their inciting to sedition and wanton violation of RA4200.

    Which would have interesting legal implications considering their provenance and origin suffer from his complete and mysterious indifference and disinterest.

  13. MarkM

    The full blog discussion regarding this entry at Sassy Lawyer broaches concerns about intimidation and politics, but until a search warrant is issued, and served (which may never happen), from a legal standpoint, it’s premature. From a political perspective, the response by PCIJ is appropriate. The battle is one of wits as the government makes threats in an attempt to intimidate PCIJ. The response from PCIJ was to address the trheats with asserting that government is functioning unethically. Government action must be held to a higher standard than strict legal readings, particularly in the context of recent events.

  14. MarkM

    I really don’t want my email address linked with my posting. Can you remove my email address, or else delete my postings? Thanks.

  15. Mark M left two thought-provoking comments, but he requested that his email address be delinked. If that’s not possible, he added, just delete the postings. I am very sorry to have to delete his comments, since I have only one setting for comments: Email addresses are required. A pity, because he raised very interesting points. As they say in Greek: Sayang.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s