Speaking of political clans - look up the names of the last four or so mayors (and vice mayors) of Davao. This problem for sure won't go away soon, forming family clans and pushing benefits to each other without the slightest bit of shame appears to be part of the DNA here.
How about the Kennedy's? It's not surprising that this happens. Your Dad has a good job, so why not follow in his footsteps? In some ways the family member is also bit of an incumbent. If people like the Dad they will probably like the relative or sibling. As a example, children of doctors who are 14% more likely to be doctors. Why So Many Children of Doctors Become Doctors: Nepotism vs. Human Capital Transfers on JSTOR Elected positions are a bit more challenging to argue cronyism (assuming no voter fraud) since the people are making the choice....good or bad. Maybe there should be a test before someone is allowed to vote. What I don't understand is the whole Marcos thing or these politicians that get convicted of crimes and then get voted into office again, and the crime is forgiven. Maybe someone here can help me to understand the Filipino thinking with respect to that. This is a forum on a place in the Philippines, so discussions are likely to focus on the Philippines. I'll bet if you go to a forum on Pakistan or India or China, you will see the same type of comments with respect to those countries. I wonder if their members are using the Philippines as an excuse. Why do some people seek to change the discussion/focus to justify a bad behavior because someone else is worse or wasn't mentioned in the news last week? If someone fails to call out all countries who are worse, that some how makes a comment invalid? Yes, all countries have problems and I'll bet you there are lots of people talking about it on forums focused on them. Do you think in those forums people are saying how we handle our drug problem is good compared to the Philippines, so let's move on? The standard should be the standard. For example, just because member A does something out of line and doesn't get reprimanded, should that be a defense for all other member to do something out of line. So yes, other countries aren't talked about because it's not in our best interest to do it or in some cases there is no point in repeating something over and over. Does all this mean we should avoid saying anything. I think no. Other people being worse or not mentioned is not a good defense in my mind. Obama said something like don't kill people without a trial and Duterte said you the son of a wh*re or whatever. I find it odd that people can somehow say one justifies the other. I'm hopeful that Duterte will be successful with his war on drugs and will be able to move on to things that that I believe affect many more people. I'm sure that will require some significant power to drive those type of changes and I hope he is up for the task. Things that limit foreign investment, keep the poor down and enrich the rich. As he goes down his path, I just hope he won't loose sight of the what I think the end goad should be, which is to improve the lives of all Filipinos.
Well, that's what the media wants "us" to believe anyway. If people (not directed at the quoted member, people in general) would take the time to watch live political speeches and proceedings in congress, then watch the news to see what is reported, it would be obvious how little news media cares about facts in favor of pushing an agenda.
I agree with you describing a western publication. How much money a paper or t.v.station makes here is a question. There really are not a lot of advertising to generate income. My guess is that owning a media company here is being able to control public opinion and that is why the rich families own them. As a bonus their children can become celebrities.
"Internal affairs" is the complaint that China always makes. But China, like the U.S. and the Philippines, is signatory to the treaty of universal human rights. And universal means what it says. Obama reacted with maturity. Of course the meeting had to be cancelled. But there were informal conversations. Obama recognized that's just how they talk down there. More serious to most Americans is calling the American ambassador a "gay". That shows real backwardness. As to Brexit, the U.S. president only pointed out that Britain would no longer be part of European trade agreements, and would go "to the back of the line" in negotiating a new one. Again, a mature and reasonable point to make.
You are right, sometimes, many times, we don't take the time to verify information that is influencing our opinions. At some point, we have to trust someone as we are rarely have all the information or first hand knowledge. Are opinions and agendas the same, sometimes they are and sometimes they are not. Not having gotten to retirement age, I'm willing to bet that many of the active posters on this forum have more time to investigate these things, so it would be great if they share those specifics. I would also add to what you said, that when people take the time and have this knowledge, that they share those specifics when those chose to express a different opinion.
The source, the source, credibility is not always what the media earns their money on, and maybe owners have other interest than the truth.
I have watched Filipino TV and it seemed to be little but commercials, hotdogs, skin whitening, laundry detergent, Sky Flakes, I'd say it was very big business indeed.
