By Nycel Jane Dela
What can you say about those people who talk badly about others in the field they’re in? Media targeting politicians, or politicians targeting the media? Though I am not against anyone, I am just a writer trying to be as validly and reliably as I could.
Anyone has the freedom to say whatever they want, as long as it doesn’t put other people down. Let’s say there are no rules about it. Yet, let us put what matters: the well-being of everyone.
“Mental health matters” is too common to say. Sometimes, this line is being used to take advantage of being mentally unwell. Going back to the issue, mental health should never be used as an excuse to avoid accountability, but neither should it be used as a reason to invalidate someone’s feelings or struggles.
In the media, criticism is part of the work. Journalists and writers are expected to ask questions, investigate issues, and report matters that concern the public. Politicians and public officials, on the other hand, also have the right to respond, correct information, and raise concerns when they believe something is inaccurate or unfair.
But somewhere between criticism and response, there is a line that should not be crossed.
Disagreement does not automatically make someone an enemy. A critical report does not automatically mean that a journalist is attacking a politician. Likewise, a politician questioning a report does not automatically mean that the entire media is being silenced.
The problem begins when the discussion stops being about the issue and becomes an attack against the person.
Calling someone names, deliberately humiliating them, spreading unverified claims, or using personal struggles to discredit them does not strengthen an argument. It only shifts attention away from what actually matters.
So, who is being unethical?
Perhaps it is not always one side.
It can be anyone who knowingly abandons fairness for the sake of winning an argument. It can be the person who uses their platform to destroy another’s reputation without sufficient basis. It can also be the person who refuses to accept legitimate criticism simply because it is uncomfortable.
Freedom of expression comes with responsibility. Having the freedom to speak does not necessarily mean that everything worth saying should be said without consideration of its consequences.
Perhaps the better question is not who has the louder voice, but who is willing to use that voice responsibly.
