Asuncion, Don Jerod B.

1:30-2:30 MWF
ACTIVITY 2 (Media Laws)
As an active social media user, cite your observed 5 threats or challenges to KBP Code posed by talented
online content creators. (Base your answers from the KBP enumerated rules and ethics which you observe are
violated)
Give an example and short explanation of the violation for each of your chosen 5.( 5 points each)
1. Article 13. SUPERSTITION AND THE OCCULT
“Sec. 1. Programs featuring superstitious and pseudo-scientific beliefs and practices, such as
supernatural powers, foretelling of the future, astrology, phrenology, palm-reading, numerology, mind-
reading, hypnotism, faith healing or similar subjects shall be careful not to induce belief in them. Care
shall be taken to prevent the exploitation of people who may be easily swayed by such superstitious
and pseudoscientific beliefs and practices.”

THREAT: Proliferation of conspiracy theories in PH

EXAMPLE: Cataloging the conspiracies on offer on YouTube is a fool’s errand, some of the superstitious
content and beliefs posted are the following: fake moon landing, flat Earth, 9/11 stuff, the Illuminati, anti-
vaxxer propaganda, medical quackery, QAnon, Nikola Tesla and the pyramids, fiat currency, global cooling,
lizard people, robot overlords, time travel, and many even odder things a viewer has never heard of.
This is a potential threat to the KBP because YouTube offers infinite opportunities to create, a closed
ecosystem, an opaque algorithm, and the chance for a very small number of people to make a very large
amount of money. While these conditions of production—which incentivize content creation at a very low
cost to YouTube—exist on other modern social platforms, YouTube’s particular constellation of them is
special. It’s why conspiracy videos get purchase on the site, and why they will be very hard to uproot.
Many Filipino online creators like AC TV and PaoLUL, often produce or curate content such as these.
Some of their topics also tackle PH controversies, tarot reading, faith healing, the new “Messiah”, or even
albularyos. A lot of people actually believe in them because it is posted by their favorite online creators.
Considering the audience may be composed of underaged viewers, I believe that they could easily be swayed
into patronizing or possibly believing their content.

2. Article 15. MUSIC

“Sec. 4. Songs with lyrics or messages that are vulgar, indecent, promote substance abuse, gender
discrimination, racism, Satanism, violence or sexual perversion or demeans a member of any
sector of society shall not be played.”

THREAT: Last May 29, 2019, the live performances of Shanti Dope rendering the song “Amatz” were
broadcasted in both programs of ABS-CBN - Umaga Kay Ganda and ASAP. Moreover, it was also posted in
Shanti Dope’s Youtube account and was streamed live on Facebook.
EXAMPLE: The lyrics of the song, “Ito hinangad ko; lipadin ay mataas pa sa kayang ipadama sayo ng
gramo, di bale ng musika ikamatay,” promotes the use of marijuana. It appears that the singer was referring to
the high effect of marijuana, being in its natural/organic state and not altered by any chemical compound.
We should respect and appreciate our artists in the music industry. However, I strongly oppose the
promotion of musical pieces or songs that encourage the recreational use of drugs like marijuana and shabu.
This is a clear violation of the Art. 15 on MUSIC.
It is contrary to our fight against illegal drugs. Airing songs that feature the use of illegal drugs as harmless
could mislead the vulnerable youth and make them believe that it is all right to use illegal drugs.

3. Sec. 9. SENSATIONALISM
“9. a. The presentation of news and commentaries must always be in good taste”

THREAT: Sensationalism in online and live commentaries on news and public affairs done by online
creators in Youtube or Facebook live.
EXAMPLE: Online content creators such as Benedict Chua, Michelle Dy, and Lloyd Cadena often
exaggerate facts in the name of views or more subscribers.
People get millions of followers and thousands of dollars for dancing to a song or taking pictures of
your face. It’s just sad that people who put the real effort get overshadowed by people with no talent. Many
online content creators often resort to “clickbait” titles or headlines and video thumbnails. But to prod a little,
what they do does take work, even if it lacks talent. They often have to keep up appearances, and lose a large
amount of social freedom most people enjoy.
When these content creators host a live video, they usually have segments about current affairs which
often tackle showbiz news. These segments done by Youtubers get a lot of following and live viewers. Because
of their influence, the presentation of news could be mistaken. Their loyal followers might coincide with their
presentation and commentaries as a form of fact.
So, when people say they don't "have talent" I agree, they don't. But not all jobs take talent, some just
take work and determination. I would say you have to be determined to get where they are at the very least. I
know a lot of very pretty people who aren't influencers and it’s probably because they don't want to
constantly act like one for the months or years before they blow up. News presentation should be handled by
professionals.

4. Article 4. PERSONAL ATTACKS

“Sec. 1. Personal attacks, that is, attacks on the honesty, integrity, or personal qualities of an
identified person, institution or group, on matters that have no bearing on the public interest are
prohibited.”
THREAT: Online content creators who use their platform to bash on fellow creators, people of
authority, or other celebrities.
EXAMPLE: Call out and cancel culture on social media.
Usually, I see many online creators participate in this kind of culture in order for them to stay relevant
and sometimes, earn views on their videos. We all know social media is a powerful tool that has many
professional and personal advantages. Which is why we use it. But while online creators do have control over
if and how they build their online presence, we typically lack control about what they say about others in
online comments and on social media.
Cancel culture is derived from call-out culture, but is directed toward celebrities and other famous
figures. An example would be Lea Salonga, who was called out for being a Marcos apologist. Netizens and
online creators were quick to tweet and post: ‘Lea Salonga is canceled.’ Canceling someone means eradicating
that person in one’s life—like the person does not exist anymore. The aim of calling out and canceling
someone is accountability—for this person to admit his or her mistake.
While social media is seen as a powerful tool to expose wrongdoing or even crimes, the acts of calling
out and canceling may be ineffective ways to hold a person accountable. Because more often than not, calling
out and canceling turn into cyberbullying—shaming a person and judging him or her as someone with no
chance of redemption. This is what’s causing social media users’ mental health to deteriorate. This is why I
think that this violates the KBP code.

5. Article 18. GAMBLING AND BETTING

“Sec. 4. Gambling shall never be presented as something good, nor shall the public be
encouraged to engage in it.”
THREAT: Online content creators who are promoting gambling through online casinos and slot
machines.
EXAMPLE: Brian Christopher is the most famous personality among YouTube slot players.

We can never deny the fact the some Filipinos are fond of gambling since it’s an easy way for them to
earn money as well as entertain themselves during their free time. Many online creators now have been
publishing daily slot machine videos playing in casinos all over the world.
Some of those who play them, also record their games on video and stream themselves playing live. In
this case, even if losing, the online creators have a chance to make a profit from advertising, sponsorships, and
super chats during livestreams. Sometimes, they also post content which encourages their viewers to
participate with them through live bets with their credit cards.
Because of this, I think it is a violation of the KBP because they [the online creators] inspire the public
to engage among their gambles and present them as something that is good.