Friday, May 22, 2009

credibility

There are really some people who are rather unkind for a reason, who are cruel for a cause. When they are convinced, for example, that there is someone whom they may no longer trust, in whom they have altogether lost their confidence, they speak their mind – saying what mean and meaning what they say. In this particular situation, more than those who simply voice out the painful truth they are certain about someone, it is the latter who really is the loser although definitely not a victim – but in reality, the victimizer. This is exactly the case when lately there were reports validated by official sources that the holder of the highest office in the land, now has no less than six spokespersons!

In other words, the public official concerned felt it either necessary or convenient or both, that the impressive number of six mouthpieces is in order – in the assumption that there is so much to say about the person, competence and achievements, concerning the plans, programs and actions of the office holder concerned. When this supposedly great news reached some no nonsense individuals, their being “unkind” and even “cruel” came to fore – especially through radio talk programs accepting call-in listeners.

The reactions to the unexpected news about the unexpected number of Malacanang spokesperson, can be thus summarized by way of conclusions: There must be too many criticisms to counteract, too much popular ill-will to neutralized. There must be much propaganda to make and few little achievements to magnify. There must be more lies to defend as well as more realities to deny. There must be much public funds to spend for the promotion of the personal desires and designs of the public figure concerned – meantime, let the poor, the hungry and the sick fend for themselves.

Needless to say, a little study could be made to find out who ate those great, illustrious and distinguished national leaders in the whole wide world who in these particular times, amazingly have six official spokespersons! The immediate thought comes to mind that these six formal mouthpieces can be compared to gatekeepers. They are many probably because there are so many gates to keep and so many gatecrashers to drive away.

If the truth and the whole truth has to be said and duly noted, the basic problem of Malacanang has been and still is its distinctly poor if not practically zero credibility before the general public. And who is really to blame for this lamentable popular conviction if not Malacanang itself. This is pursuant to the maxim “What you sow is what you reap.” It all began with the expressed and formal commitment that someone was not running for office – only for the same to claim that God spoke to the opposite. And such incredible allegation was thereafter followed by a litany of consonant gross misdeeds. And Philippine History is still in the making – specially so as 2010 fast approaches.



+OVCruz, DD
May 22, 2009