The social media platforms have taken over the distribution of news globally. They treat a lie the same way you would treat a fact.
The difference between Rappler and other newsgroups in the Philippines is that journalists control Rappler both editorially and commercially. We make decisions that are bad for business but protect the public sphere.
Interpretation
What this quote means
Rappler prioritizes public interest over commercial gain, unlike many other news organizations.
In this quote, Maria Ressa highlights the unique position of Rappler in the Philippines' media landscape. While many newsgroups often prioritize profitability and commercial interests, Rappler maintains editorial independence, allowing its journalists to make choices that serve the public good, even if those decisions may negatively impact the company's financial performance. This commitment reflects a broader ethos in journalism that values accountability and integrity over mere business success.
Themes
In practice
Example use cases
In a speech about media ethics, I might reference Maria Ressa's commitment to journalistic integrity.
More from Maria Ressa
All quotes →If you want to rip the heart out of a democracy, you go after the facts. That's what modern authoritarians do. You lie. All the time. Then, you say it's your opponents and the journalists who lie.
Embrace your fear. Imagine what you're most afraid of, touch it and hold it so that you rob it of its power.
Let me go back to a fundamental thing we all used to agree on: information is power. That's why we became journalists in the first place.
Technology enabled Rappler's fast growth starting in 2012, but we were also among the first victims when social media was weaponized in 2016.
In 14 months, my government, the Philippine 2 government, has filed 11 cases. I posted bail eight times, I've been arrested twice in five weeks, detained once, and the only thing I've done, my only crime is to be a journalist, to speak truth to power.
Similar quotes
I suppose, in the end, we journalists try - or should try - to be the first impartial witnesses of history. If we have any reason for our existence, the least must be our ability to report history as it happens so that no one can say: 'we didn't know - no one told us.'
I violated, apparently, an unspoken rule that we are supposed to take care of our own. Frankly, if that invites discomfort, I welcome it. I don't think there's enough discomfort in journalism, especially in Washington.
I kept thinking, I'm not going to do political journalism, because there's no way to keep my principles and be a political journalist, so I'll edit a popular science magazine. This will be my salvation, and I'll emerge with my integrity intact. That didn't even happen.
Whenever you're reporting, there's always something you can't say or write, but the questions, you always want to get as close to that line as possible. You want to ask the tough questions.
The most important ethical issues and the most difficult ones are the human ones because a reporter has enormous power to hurt people.
Budget cuts are a sad reality in most newsrooms, and I am concerned that they reduce the collective muscle of journalists who are doing the expensive, and often dangerous, work of on-the-ground reporting.