RapplerIndependentCenterFactual 90Objective 8518 days agoA Facebook post by Philstar.com debunked a viral graphic claiming to list 22 names associated with confidential funds managed by Vice President Sara Duterte during her impeachment trial. The graphic included names like 'Miggy Mango' and 'Annie Gher,' which were alleged to be recipients of these funds. However, Philstar.com clarified that these names were fabricated and not present in the original impeachment trial graphics. The real graphic, published on August 3, listed only 11 verified names found in official records such as the Senate’s journal and livestream. The controversy arose as social media users debated whether the use of aliases was justified due to the confidential nature of the funds. The impeachment trial focused on the Commission on Audit’s findings related to Duterte’s offices, with prosecutors questioning auditors about the acknowledgment receipts.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a factual correction without overtly favoring any political side. It provides evidence from official records and clarifies the discrepancy between the circulated graphic and the verified information. While the impeachment trial itself is politically charged, the article remains
Why factuality (90): The article accurately reports that a fabricated graphic containing false names was debunked by Philstar.com. It provides specific details about the claim, the rating given ('FALSE'), and the reasons for the fact-check, aligning closely with the cross-source consensus that the graphic was indeed fak
Why objectivity (85): The article maintains a neutral and factual tone throughout, presenting the information objectively without taking sides or using emotionally charged language. It clearly states the findings of the fact-check and avoids any personal bias or opinion.
Aid or reward? Hontiveros puzzled by OVP’s secret funds for medicinesSenator Risa Hontiveros has expressed confusion over the use of confidential funds by Vice President Sara Duterte's office to purchase medicines, questioning whether these funds should be considered aid or rewards for informants. She raised concerns about the potential misuse of resources and questioned the health status of the informants involved. The situation highlights ongoing scrutiny of the administration's handling of sensitive financial matters.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the use of confidential funds as potentially unethical or improper, suggesting skepticism toward the administration's actions. This aligns with a left-leaning perspective that often scrutinizes executive power and calls for transparency. The emphasis on questioning the intent and
Why factuality (80): The article discusses Senator Risa Hontiveros questioning the purpose of the confidential funds used by VP Sara Duterte's office. While it raises valid questions about the nature of the funds, it does not provide definitive answers or cite specific evidence to support the claims made. However, it al
Why objectivity (75): The article presents the concerns of Senator Hontiveros in a relatively neutral manner, allowing her questions to be the focus without overtly supporting one side over the other. However, it lacks additional context or counterpoints, slightly reducing its overall balance.
RapplerIndependentProgressiveFactual 60Objective 3016 days ago [Edgewise] ‘Public School Confidential’The article discusses the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte, focusing on allegations that she misused confidential funds by deploying secret agents to public schools. It includes commentary from legal experts and fictionalized dialogues that highlight the complexities of the case. The piece also references legal arguments surrounding her alleged threats against President Rodrigo Duterte and the use of legal terminology to frame the narrative. The tone is informal and uses humor and exaggeration, blending real legal concepts with fictional elements.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the impeachment proceedings in a manner that suggests skepticism toward the administration and highlights potential misconduct. While it presents legal arguments, the overall tone leans left by emphasizing the need for accountability and using language that implies the opposition,
Why factuality (60): The article makes several unsubstantiated claims about VP Sara Duterte using 'confidential funds' to deploy 'secret agents' to public schools, citing fictional characters like Andy Lim and Mary Grace Piattos. These details are not supported by any credible evidence or sources. Additionally, the arti
Why objectivity (30): The article uses highly biased and satirical language, such as referring to the vice president as being in a 'pickle,' suggesting she 'can throw a mean MacBook,' and inventing fictional dialogues. It also frames the situation in a mocking tone, favoring a particular narrative without presenting bala
PH
