What Bobby Reyes is doing, is advocacy journalism, although he is trying to be objective. – Joseph G. Lariosa

There is an online discussion group that is based in Chicago. Some of the members of the group write for local Filipino-American community newspapers. Bobby Reyes, Jesse Jose and Romy R. Marquez, who all write for the MabuhayRadio.com, are participants in the said discussion panel. Lately, the question of Bobby Reyes’ style of reporting was brought into focus by Rey Villar.

The Internet has made it possible for groups scattered around the nation, or for that matter, around the world, to discuss matters of mutual interest. Sometimes, the discussions can shed light on very good topics of importance to the community.

An objective journalist would never call people (i.e., NaFFAA) "crooks" unless they are convicted. – Rey Villar

 Here is what Rey Villar wrote:

QUOTE.

Mr. Reyes,

I don't know you enough to know whether or not you can be as objective as other professional journalists. However, the tone of your emails and some of the words you use seem to belie that claim.

For example, an objective journalist would never call people (i.e., NaFFAA) "crooks" unless they are convicted. An objective journalist would not mock any person or group who espouses the basic American judicial virtue of "the assumption of innocence." An objective journalist would not send glee-filled emails celebrating the tragic fall of another flawed human being. A columnist would, especially a columnist with an agenda . . . but not an objective journalist.

I don't know Mr. Menor, but by all accounts, he made a mistake, and he's paying dearly for it. It's right to report the facts, as this is news for the community. But your emails had a clear celebratory and at times taunting tone to them, which is unfitting for a man your age.

Mr. Reyes, I hope that you can be as objective as the best journalists. More to the point, I hope that you would be as objective as the best journalists.

UNQUOTE.

I have written so many times that only crooks refuse to provide the public with the financial statements of the events that they have organized and managed. – Bobby Reyes

In turn Bobby Reyes answered Mr. Villar.

Quote.

Dear Mr. Villar:

1.0    I must request again that you please read the articles in the  NaFFAAgate of the www.mabuhayradio.com. There are 19 articles in the section and despite the presence of a Public Relations Director in the NaFFAA national headquarters, the federation's national executive officers (NEOs) refused to rebut or make any comment to our exposés. They chose to ignore my reports, as they just explain to the public not to mind me for I am a "crazy troublemaker out to destroy the federation." But the public is not buying their explanation. The Menor case has proven my accusations and reports to be true.

        1.1    As you will note, we print letters to us and even unfavorable comments, such as your remarks, in their entirety -- without any censorship on our part. That is how we practice freedom of the press.

2.0    RE: Use of the words: Crook and Crooks. We used them to challenge the NaFFAA NEOs to file libel against us but to date only one of them, Lourdes A. Ongkeko, a NaFFAA cofounder and first regional chairperson of the NaFFAA chapter in Southern CA, filed a libel case against me in September 2000. I defended myself at the one-week trial at the Los Angeles Superior Court and won five out of the seven issues. And I did not present any witness or even any exhibit. More importantly, the jury decided in August 2002 that I acted without any malice. The rest of the NaFFAA NEOs just prefer to suffer in silence and they do not mind if their collective reputation is now perceived to be that of a clique of crooks. Why? Truth is a defense in libel cases.

3.0    And please compare my writings to the output of other Filipino-American journalists and writers. With few exceptions, almost all of the Filipino-American writers write only praise releases.

        3.1    Joseph Lariosa wrote about me being a muckraker and which I quoted in a satire,  Why Did the Filipino Chicken Cross the American Road?   Here are Mr. Lariosa's alleged words, as slanted to fit the purposes of the satire: "Once again Bobby Reyes has done the unexpected and even the unthinkable. This guy has too much wit and humor that he is elevating the process of eliciting laughter (and making fun of his adversaries) into an art form. This is the same way that he has elevated muckraking into an art."

        3.2    So please go first to browse the NaFFAAgate section and the articles therein and perhaps your perception of me will change. Perhaps eventually you will conclude that my writings are needed by the Filipino-American community. Besides, as two Filipino consuls general in Los Angeles said, "Bobby Reyes makes life interesting in the Filipino-American community."

        3.3    And finally, you are wrong when you said that a journalist (or for that matter to me, anybody) would need a court conviction for journalists to call certain people as "crooks." What is your legal basis for that? Can you cite any decided cases? Perhaps journalist Joseph Lariosa and columnist Jesse Jose may like to comment on your premise.

                    3.3.1    As for me, I have written so many times that only crooks refuse to provide the public with the financial statements of the events that they have organized and managed.

                    3.3.2    To date, Mr. Menor and his convention cochair, Rodel Rodis, and the NaFFAA NEOs like Loida Nicolas Lewis and her successor, Alma Q. Kern, continue to refuse to release the financial statement of the NaFFAA convention in San Jose, CA, in August 2002.

3.3.3         After the City of San Jose conducted the audit and found out the financial scams committed by Mr. Menor (who was then a NaFFAA national director) and verified that he used city funds earmarked for the Northside Community Center for senior citizens and veterans) to bankroll the NaFFAA convention and after the District Attorney filed the criminal case (on three counts) against Mr. Menor in the Superior Court, would the ordinary folks not conclude that some of the NaFFAA NEOs are crooks?

UNQUOTE.

Reyes advocated for NaFFAA’s reform (thru his ATIC). But not its destruction. I did not see him encourage an organization of NaFFAA’s replacement either. – Joseph G. Lariosa

Joseph G. Lariosa, the Chicago-based correspondent of the Manila Bulletin and Tempo newspapers of the Philippines, in turn posted these remarks:

QUOTE.

Dear Rey:

When Bobby claimed to have out-scooped the San Jose Mercury News, you will have to give him credit for that.

Getting first-hand story for a struggling online outlet that does not have a paid reporter to prowl for community news events like the San Jose Mercury News is already a big accomplishment for Bobby.

Since Bobby has a source, who is also party in the case, it was natural for him to beat, if not match, the Mercury News to the court story.

I was planning to follow up the same story next week because its trial is scheduled on May 12. But I did not foresee Ben Menor coping a “no contest” plea six days before the trial. That’s why I congratulated him for it.

In the case of Bobby’s reporting, if he appears to have a chip on his shoulder when he is editorializing, instead of being objective, those familiar with Bobby’s style are no longer wondering about it.

Actually, Bobby has an ax to grind against the "NaFFAA NEO’s" because Bobby believes that they conspired in easing him out of the NaFFAA organization after his family spent a fortune during a flawed election.

Since then, he advocated for NaFFAA’s reform (thru his ATIC). But not its destruction. I did not see him encourage an organization of NaFFAA’s replacement either.

He just decided to do his own thing by joining or organizing small community organizations in his little kingdom in Los Angeles while waiting for NaFFAA NEOs to make mistake, like the Mr. Ben Menor case.

I think, what Bobby is doing, is advocacy journalism, although he is trying to be objective.

In the case of Bobby calling someone “crook” before somebody is being convicted of a crime in a criminal case, Bobby is wrong. I will not call somebody such because I don’t want to risk a libel suit. Bobby is in denial that he did not lose in the Ongkeko case. The only reason the libel case cannot be enforced is because there is no income to be collected from him. Bobby should not use his lack of income to call somebody a “crook” when he could not obtain the information he needs from somebody invoking Privacy Rights.

He is lucky the libel law in the U.S. does not provide imprisonment, unlike in the Philippines.

But it is allowed to call somebody “under indictment” if somebody was really indicted. Or a “convict” when somebody was convicted.

This is just my take on this thread.

Thanks for sharing your reasoned and sound postings.

UNQUOTE.

QUOTE. 

All newspapers practice advocacy journalism.  It's the VOICE of a newspaper.  The New York Times does it.  The Wall Street Journal practices it.  All the national broadcast journalists and news analysts of ABC, NBC, CNN, FOX, MSNBC do it all the time. – Jesse Jose

Jesse Jose, the journalist and columnist who is based in Seattle, Washington, sent in his remarks about “advocacy journalism.”

Hello, Joseph,

You hit the nail right on the head when you said "what Bobby is doing is advocacy journalism."  That kind of journalism is defined as taking a stand on an issue that you honestly believe in and defending that belief with your heart and soul.  To others like Rey Villar it might look like "diatribe." 

But that's merely an opinion, NOT fact. 

All newspapers practice advocacy journalism.  It's the VOICE of a newspaper.  The New York Times does it.  The Wall Street Journal practices it.  All the national broadcast journalists and news analysts of ABC, NBC, CNN, FOX, MSNBC do it all the time  When we read and hear these people, they sound as if they're giving us the news, and sure they give us the news ... but always with a SLANT!  It's the same news item, but delivered to the news consumers, may I repeat, ALWAYS with a slant. 

That slant is the VOICE of that particular newspaper or particular TV channel.

If you would watch Charles Gibson of ABC, for instance, deliver his news and then watch Brian Williams of NBC deliver the same news item, you'll notice that they deliver that same news item differently.  They attack it differently, they approach it differently and they interpret it differently.  Each has a different SLANT!  Each has a different angle!

And us, the consumers of the news, DEPENDING as to who we want to believe, give the credence or listen to the journalist, who parallels our way of thinking.  And dismiss the other journalist's "interpretation" as a "diatribe."

Well, as you said, this is America, where people are free to express their opinions, without fear.  So, let's hear more of Bobby Reyes's diatribe.  Let him expose more NaFFAA crooks and crooks within our community, big or small.  Let him write to his heart's content.   

UNQUOTE.

Bobby Reyes's brand of journalism is a variety of what some also call "public journalism." – Joseph G. Lariosa

 Here is what Joseph Lariosa answered Mr. Jose:

Dear Jesse:

A toast to your take on Bobby's risky form of advocacy journalism.

At least Bobby is forewarned.

You cited instances to support Bobby's brand of journalism, which is a variety of what some also call "public journalism."

Salud!

UNQUOTE.

(To be continued . . .)