Is it appropriate for media personalities to say "follow us on twitter or add us in facebook"?

Is it appropriate for media personalities to say or promote a particular social networking site when they invite their viewers to follow them on twitter or facebook?

A resounding YES!

There is no law prohibiting media personalities from endorsing their preferred social networking sites in the course of their broadcast. At best, the provisions of the New Civil Code of the Philippines can be the source of an argument for those with opposing views.

Article 19 of the New Civil Code provides that “Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.”

It is imperative to note that while the mentioned article is considered as a catch-all provision, it must however be necessary to consider the position of the proponent before commenting harshly to this blog.

While the law directs the manner by which a person must handle his affairs, it is also equally important to determine the rights which a media personality, particularly a news anchor, has while performing his job inside the studio.

As a news anchor, he must deliver the news with impartiality, disregarding his own dismay or liking to that article that he just read. Whether or not he is affected by such, he should not let it interfere with his duty to READ the NEWS.  

Now that his major role has been established, let us now go to my view that their tendencies to say " like us on facebook" or "follow us on twitter" are really acceptable.

First, as I mentioned at the opening of my blog, there is NO LAW prohibiting them from saying this or should I say promoting these social websites. They have a right to do whatever they want as long as they are not prejudicial to the rights of other persons.

Do I hear reactions? Some would say that it is prejudicing the rights of other social networking sites given that there are undue favors given to Twitter and Facebook. How so? Could it be that the matter of patronizing a particular forum is solely dependent on the discretion and choice of the user? Assuming for the sake of argument that there indeed was a violation, does it deprive other social networking sites of possible income or popularity which will ultimately lead to duopoly? (is there such a word) I DO NOT THINK SO! Again, it all boils down to one thing, its consumer's preference man!

Second, what is this right to freedom of expression that is being talked about by our very own 1987 Constition? Is this right absolute?  Let's discuss.

Article 3 Section 4 of the 1987 Constitution provides that "No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances."

   

Is this law applicable to the current discussion? Yes. To flag as inappropriate the act of these media persons is a curtailment of the freedom granted to them. Certainly this act does not fall under any of the exceptions as to when this right may be deprived. I will no longer discuss the exceptions as it already seem to be an overkill given that the point that I am trying to drive at is that this freedom may be curtailed but not for causing an alleged "unfair competition towards other social networking sites."

Third, I read after googling that France no longer allows their media practitioners to openly say "follow us on twitter or facebook." Instead, they resort to saying "follow us on a social networking site" which I personally consider as stupid. How so? There are many social sites offering the same services and how, in this good earth, will the viewer find which website is used by the anchor? Duh!

Nevertheless, at least France has a law which entitles them to prohibit news anchors from openly promoting the network in which they are a part of.  This 1992 law prohibits the mere mention of these sites on-air unless, twitter and facebook are in the news themselves (excerpts from an article witten by Devin Brown in cbsnews.com). Again, going back to my initial statement, there is a law which prohibits that's why they can enforce it.

In closing, I may somewhat agree to the proposition that undue recognition is given to these big social sites. However, it not their fault that recognition is afforded to them by their users, most especially those in the media industry. It is just that their sites offer the best services fit for the requirements of the user. Those "not- so-recognized sites" should perhaps improve what they are offering to the people and let the people make the choice on whether to shift or not.

As a final statement, media practitioners in the Philippines should be allowed to say "like us on facebook" or "follow us on twitter" on-air.

Thank you for reading!

DISCLAIMER: The writer is a law student and the contents of this article are merely his opinion. It does not, in any manner, provide legal advice and as such, cannot be a source of a legal right.