{"id":1090,"date":"2012-09-07T11:52:07","date_gmt":"2012-09-07T03:52:07","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nargalzius.com\/blog\/?p=1090"},"modified":"2012-09-07T11:52:07","modified_gmt":"2012-09-07T03:52:07","slug":"political-disingenuity","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/nargalzius.com\/blog\/archives\/2012\/09\/07\/political-disingenuity","title":{"rendered":"Political Disingenuity"},"content":{"rendered":"

This article<\/a> pretty much sums up the salient points – so there’s no need to repeat them. She’s totally right, but then we really didn’t need anyone tell us that what’s happening with this whole Sotto circus has reached ridiculous proportions.<\/p>\n

As for the article being too hard on Enrile or Stantiago, I can understand the frustration that made her say the things she said. But for me, their statements may have stemmed from the simple fact that the context<\/em> of which the content was delivered didn’t merit legal action – subjectively<\/strong> speaking, of course.<\/p>\n

Context<\/h1>\n

The context of this speech was to simply give reasons why he personally took the stance he did – whether the reasons are his own or gleaned from other’s insights (obviously it was the latter). This is different from asserting an “expert opinion” on a matter – like if it was a trial and he was on the stand as an expert witness – in that case, people expect his words to be his own – as its supposed to be his<\/em> “expert” opinion. This is also different from an academic setting where all submitted content are academic exercises to know if a person is capable of formulating\/assetiong conclusions\/opinions\/positions themselves.<\/em><\/p>\n

So in that, I’d cut Enrile and Santiago a little slack – perhaps they didn’t qualify their statements enough to please everyone. But I think they were coming from a reasonable place.<\/p>\n

Real Underlying Problem<\/h1>\n

I think the problem is that the country has a culture of copycat-ism. And that lack of diligence to cross-Ts and dot-Is as far as intellectual and creative rights has made a lot of people very complacent, sometimes ignorant, or sometimes not entirely certain on these issues.<\/p>\n

Take for example the entertainment industry. I’m not much of a TV person (ever since the Internet) but from what I remember (and see whenever I get the chance) an overwhelming majority of our “content” 1 <\/sup><\/a>Or at least the content that is commercially pushed\/marketed by the industry<\/span><\/span>