IN the field of journalism, the directive is clear: speak truth to power, expose those who remain hidden, and hold those comfortable in their seats accountable. Yet, in practice, these concepts remain an afterthought. Too often, some reporters and media practitioners “turn the other cheek”—not in the biblical context of avoiding conflict, but in a more grim sense of ignoring the injustices and choosing silence when truth begs to be told.

Journalists are considered the “watchdogs of society,” independent from the government and other powerful institutions, an integral part of society that keeps those in power in check. We are the absolute voice that keeps corruption at bay, yet what happens when that voice suddenly selects what it speaks?

Recently, Pasig City Mayor Vico Sotto took to Facebook, calling out journalists regarding their feature stories on contractors Cezarah Rowena “Sarah” Discaya and her husband, Pacifico “Curlee” Discaya II, which circulated online. The photo, coupled with the post, was an image that included the stories from both Korina Sanchez and Julius Babao, household names in the field.

For starters, Korina Sanchez and Julius Babao aren’t your small-time reporters scraping for bits and pieces of a story; they are decorated journalists, almost to the point of being celebrities, whose careers span decades in the making. They’ve been in the field long before some of us could even form a thought. 

Sotto in his post said, “Bago tanggapin ng mga kilalang journalists ang alok para mag-interview ng Contractor na Pumapasok sa Politika, hindi ba nila naisip na, “Uy teka, ba’t kaya handa ’to magbigay ng 10 million* para lang magpa-interview sa akin?”” 

Sanchez’s camp released a statement addressing the concern, stating that “there was no such thing as a P10 million placement for an interview.” Yet an earlier statement, now deleted, had acknowledged payments without any specified amounts, an already alarming notion. 

On the other hand, Babao clarified and denied that his feature with the Discaya couple was a paid placement in his interview with PEP.ph. He stressed that his piece was recorded long before Sarah Discaya announced her political bid running as mayor in Pasig and that it was a lifestyle feature of the couple, not a news report. 

“Walang katotohanang may ₱10 million na involved for this interview. The vlog’s aim was simply to inspire viewers with a rags-to-riches story,” he explained.

However, Sotto stresses not the amount—he didn’t even accuse the broadcasters directly—simply addresses the implication of the interview itself.

The husband and wife featured in their “lifestyle” stories are no strangers—Sarah and Curlee Discaya are owners of two of the top 15 contractors for flood control projects, namely Alpha & Omega Gen. Contractor & Development Corp. and St. Timothy Construction Corporation, which have been held under scrutiny by the President himself. 

The now-removed interview, tagged to be a “rags-to-riches” story highlighting the couple, turned out to be a showcase of the Discayas’ entourage of luxury cars, parading about their riches for the public eye to see, even revealing that all of these were possible due to their “earnings” from the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH). Adding to this, the irony of their nonappearance in the recent flood control probe of the Senate left a bad taste in my mouth that I could almost taste the lead.

Did this not invite any speculation from the seasoned journalists? Not even a single raised question? Did they not see the shade behind all that glitz and glam? Surely they have the means to acquire the information that their would-be guests were owners of flagged, murky companies and aspirants of political seats.

It was right there and then that the opportunity presented itself for them to uncover the truth. But what did we get? 

Forty. Luxury. Cars.

This wasn’t a story; this was a victory lap, blatantly mocking the people they so ignorantly trample upon. 

Journalism isn’t selective. Journalism is meant for the people. It isn’t plain entertainment where those on top can simply ask for favorable coverage, as if it were a PR stunt—there shouldn’t even be favorable coverage to begin with. Journalism is confronting the hard truths no one dares to speak. It’s about digging deep to uncover the atrocities they so desperately wish to conceal. 

We don’t glorify, we investigate. We are in service to the truth, not to those hiding from it.

Sure, they can go on and on about their narratives that shed light on stories, claiming they have the public’s interest in mind, yet what if that public interest is simply bought?

It undermines the entire essence of the industry and takes a piss on the ethos that journalists pride themselves on. The people rely on us to demand accountability, but how so when we refuse to bear it ourselves?

The stories we put forward are built upon trust and independence, and if that erodes, are we even worthy of calling ourselves watchdogs? 

Remember, a free press paid to look away is no press at all.