How to not be a Big Bad Blogger

See what the brouhahaha is all about at:
and the “final word” at:
I like Carlo Ople’s take on it at:
and of course in his first post on the matter he makes the point that sometimes (!!!) these PR agencies purport to represent these bloggers WITHOUT THEIR SAY SO.
As Carlo puts it in

“Did the blogger really know that the PR Agency is “representing” him? For all we know the PR is just using his name and he really just did write a glowing review for the first restaurant and a bad one for the next. I strongly recommend that the restaurant and the writer of the article give the name of the blog because that would only be the fair thing to do.”

I also like the points that Jaymie “The Bull Runner” Pizarro mentions in among them what she does with paid posts:

” I do not accept paid posts. You can’t make me rave about a sucky product or sing praises about a flawed race. Conversely, I will raise negative points about products or services but with due respect to the parties involved. Usually, out of courtesy, I inform the race organizer or the supplier about the negative review beforehand. It’s cliche, but it really is for the benefit of the entire community. I have a high respect for companies that accept critiques without taking it personally; it truly shows professionalism, desire to improve, and humility.”

Well, let’s take Jaymie’s idea to its logical conclusion – why not have a MENU of what you’re actually going to do as a blogger? Well check out where there’s 14 (!!!) levels of differentiation as to how she’s being compensated. If you’d like to use it for your own blog see:

Without naming names – people actually got named either in speculation or even in the comments as this particular comment by Noemi does:

“if Margaux Salcedo was sincere/honest in her reasons for article, these PR and blogger should not be in business at all. Her source was not even direct was it? From Stephanie Zubiri? The apology I was looking for was apology for hurting the feelings of the innocent or those alluded to in the article. Not apology for writing the article.”

People would like to see this die down and the issue closed but would bloggers actually do differently after this to ensure that there will be a different result next time?

And, oh yeah – there is a FREE COURSE that covers DEFAMATION at

And if you want the Philippine context see:

“Republic of the Philippines. “The Revised Penal Code”. Chan Robles law Firm. Retrieved 2006-11-24. “Art. 353. Definition of libel. – A libel is public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead.”


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s