Exposed: How Media Fuels Fake News by Prioritizing Drama Over Truth!

Wazzup Pilipinas!?

​The recent hearings conducted by the House of Representatives' Tri-Committee (Tri-Comm) on the proliferation of fake news have brought to light a critical issue: the media's tendency to prioritize sensational confrontations over substantive discussions aimed at addressing misinformation.​

Sensationalism Overshadowing Substance

During the second hearing on February 18, 2025, Ross Flores Del Rosario, founder of Wazzup Pilipinas, reiterated that the headlines were dominated by the heated exchange between Congressman Dante Marcoleta and a vlogger (first hearing held on February 4, 2025) and a high-ranking military official (second hearing on February 18, 2025). Similarly, the first hearing saw extensive coverage of the confrontation between Congressman Marcoleta and vlogger Atty. Ricky Tomotorgo. These high-profile clashes, while newsworthy, overshadowed the more structured and insightful inquiries led by Congressman Zia Adiong. Adiong's methodical questioning elicited essential information that are more crucial to understanding and combating the spread of fake news.​

In the same vein, Congresswoman Geraldine Roman proposed the establishment of a "Digital Council," akin to an advertising council, tasked with evaluating vlogger content prior to its online publication. This proactive measure aims to curb the dissemination of disinformation at its source. Regrettably, such constructive proposals received minimal media attention compared to the sensational confrontations.​

Media's Role in Shaping Public Discourse

The media wields significant influence in shaping public perception. By prioritizing sensational stories over in-depth policy discussions, media outlets may inadvertently foster a culture more captivated by controversy than by solutions. This trend is evident in the coverage of the recent hearings, where confrontations received prominent attention, while substantive policy proposals were relegated to the background.​

Public Consumption Patterns

This media approach aligns with the consumption habits of many Filipinos, who often prefer content reminiscent of dramatic teleseryes over intellectual discourse. While engaging content is not inherently negative, an overemphasis on sensationalism can detract from the public's understanding of critical issues, such as the mechanisms and consequences of fake news.​

The Path Forward

Addressing the fake news dilemma requires a multifaceted approach:​

Balanced Media Reporting: Media outlets should strive for a balance between reporting sensational events and providing in-depth coverage of policy discussions and solutions.​

Public Education: There is a need for programs that educate the public on media literacy, enabling consumers to discern between sensationalism and substantive information.​

Legislative Measures: Proposals like Congresswoman Roman's Digital Council should be given due consideration, as they offer structural solutions to preempt the dissemination of fake news.​

By shifting focus from sensationalism to substance, both media and the public can contribute to a more informed and resilient society, capable of tackling the challenges posed by misinformation.​

Kris Aquino Breaks Silence: ‘Irrelevant’? The Truth Behind Her Shocking Decision!

Wazzup Pilipinas!?

​Kris Aquino, once hailed as the "Queen of All Media" in the Philippines, has gracefully transitioned from the relentless spotlight of show business to prioritize her health and personal well-being. In recent years, she has faced significant health challenges, leading her to reassess her life's priorities and public presence.​

Embracing a New Chapter

In response to a follower's comment urging her to create a "pasabog" (explosive issue) to regain her former prominence, Aquino candidly shared her perspective. She expressed contentment with stepping back from the limelight, emphasizing that the toll of maintaining public relevance was not worth compromising her health and peace of mind. Aquino acknowledged that while she and her sons, Joshua and Bimby, are materially secure, her previous drive was fueled by ego rather than genuine necessity. This introspection led her to prioritize wellness over public image, a decision underscored by her statement: "It took so much prayer for me to be at peace with who I am and where I am."​

Health Battles and Resilience

Aquino's health journey has been fraught with challenges. She has been diagnosed with multiple autoimmune diseases, including autoimmune thyroiditis, chronic spontaneous urticaria, Churg-Strauss syndrome, systemic sclerosis, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis. These conditions have necessitated intensive treatments and periods of isolation due to her compromised immunity. Despite these hurdles, Aquino's determination remains unwavering. She has publicly shared her experiences, expressing gratitude for the support received and a steadfast refusal to succumb to her ailments. In a heartfelt message, she stated, "I refuse to disappoint all those praying for me." ​

A Return to Professional Endeavors

Demonstrating resilience, Aquino has gradually resumed professional activities. In February 2025, she returned to work, a significant milestone considering her health challenges. Close friend and writer-editor Dindo Balares shared that Aquino's return to work, though taxing, signifies her enduring commitment to her craft. This comeback is a testament to her strength and dedication, even as she continues to manage her health conditions. ​

Personal Life and Support System

Throughout her health journey, Aquino has leaned on her family and close friends for support. In June 2024, she confirmed a new relationship with Dr. Michael Padlan, a surgeon based in Makati City. This relationship has provided her with additional strength and confidence, especially during challenging times. Aquino has expressed gratitude for the unwavering support from her loved ones and the public, acknowledging that their prayers and well-wishes have been a source of comfort and motivation. ​

Looking Forward

As of February 2025, Kris Aquino continues to navigate her health journey with resilience and grace. Her story is a powerful reminder of the importance of prioritizing personal well-being over public perception. By embracing her current path, she exemplifies courage and authenticity, inspiring many to find peace and strength amidst life's challenges.​

From Bountiful Seas to Imported Freezers: A Critical Look at the 25,000-MT Fish Importation Policy

Wazzup Pilipinas!?

In a move that has ignited passionate debate across the archipelago, the Department of Agriculture (DA) has approved the importation of 25,000 metric tons (MT) of frozen fish and seafood products—from salmon and sardines to scallops, lobster, and octopus—for the period spanning March to May 2025. Proponents argue this decision will help stabilize market prices and ensure an adequate supply amid rising inflation, while critics see it as emblematic of a broader failure in government policy, especially given the Philippines’ vast marine resources.

The Policy in Detail

According to several recent reports, DA Secretary Francisco "Kiko" Tiu Laurel Jr. signed Memorandum Order No. 12 to allow the importation of roughly 40 types of fish and aquatic products. The move is justified on the grounds that many of the species being imported are not locally caught, thus offering greater variety to the food service industry without directly competing with local fishermen. Guidelines stipulate that only importers meeting strict accreditation requirements and utilizing Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR)–approved cold storage facilities may participate in the process. This policy is said to be a short-term measure to avert potential price spikes during a critical supply period 

Economic Rationale Versus Local Realities

Official statements claim that this policy will “help in the ease of doing business” and not adversely affect local fishermen. In reality, however, many are questioning whether importing such massive quantities of seafood is the best route for an archipelagic nation endowed with abundant marine biodiversity. Critics note that while importation may temporarily stabilize prices, it risks undermining local fisheries—an industry that countless Filipino families depend on for their livelihoods.

The debate becomes even more heated when one considers the paradox: the Philippines, surrounded by vast, resource-rich waters, is choosing to import fish that could otherwise be harvested domestically. Detractors argue that rather than investing in post-harvest facilities, addressing overfishing, or boosting sustainable aquaculture, the government is channeling funds into an importation program that benefits foreign suppliers and, possibly, private interests within the fishing industry 

Political Underpinnings and Conflict of Interest

At the center of this controversy is DA Secretary Francisco Tiu Laurel Jr.—a billionaire with deep roots in the fishing industry. Before his appointment, Laurel served as the president of the Frabelle Fishing Corporation, a major player in deep-sea fishing across the Asia-Pacific region 

His dual roles as both a government official and a fishing tycoon have raised red flags among critics, who contend that his personal business interests may be influencing policy decisions. Many voices in civil society and the opposition have called for greater transparency and accountability, with some even demanding his resignation, arguing that the government’s current trajectory only serves to enrich a select few at the expense of national food security.

Urban Demand and the Myth of Self-Sufficiency

Adding fuel to the fire is the claim—circulated widely among critics—that metropolitan regions like the National Capital Region (NCR) consume as much as 500 tons of fish and seafood per day. While official figures have yet to confirm this statistic, the assertion underscores a broader concern: if major urban centers are so heavily reliant on imported seafood, then local producers are effectively being sidelined. Detractors argue that rather than showcasing an agricultural nation capable of feeding its people from its own bountiful seas, the government is morphing into an “importation machine” that masks its inability to develop the domestic sector 

Election-Time Economics or Genuine Food Security?

Skeptics also point to the timing of this decision. With the upcoming elections, some analysts believe that the importation policy might serve dual purposes: not only will it stabilize prices in the short term, but it might also distract from deeper systemic issues in the agricultural and fisheries sectors. Critics see this as a politically motivated maneuver—a way to temporarily ease consumer prices while sidestepping the need for comprehensive reforms that would bolster local production and truly secure the nation’s food supply.

A Call for Policy Reorientation

For many Filipinos, the situation is emblematic of a larger malaise in agricultural governance. Instead of relying predominantly on imports, there is a growing chorus advocating for a strategic pivot: invest in modernizing local fisheries, implement sustainable aquaculture practices, and improve infrastructure across the supply chain. Such measures could not only ensure long-term food security but also protect the livelihoods of millions of Filipino fishermen, whose daily struggles are too often overlooked in policy debates.

Conclusion

The decision to import 25,000 MT of frozen fish products has ignited a multifaceted debate. On one side, the government touts the measure as necessary for price stabilization and market variety; on the other, critics decry it as a short-sighted policy that reflects deeper issues of mismanagement, potential conflicts of interest, and an erosion of national self-sufficiency. As the Philippines navigates these turbulent waters, the challenge remains: how can the nation reconcile its rich marine heritage with the economic imperatives of a modern, competitive market?

Ultimately, if the goal is to achieve genuine food security and sustainable economic growth, the conversation must shift from temporary fixes to long-term investments in local production—a shift that, for many, is long overdue.