Wazzup Pilipinas!
So which side are we supposed to be? Our readers or the brands?
We are torn between laughing out loud, or getting terribly frustrated when we see people praising, or bashing, a product, service or event that deserves otherwise.
Nowadays, brands, through PRs or event organizers, could easily invite almost anybody to boost their positive image. We get to frown at both the brand and influencer(s) especially when we know the truth. Sadly, many could be easily bought by a talent fee or token of appreciation just to say something positive, or negative, about a brand.
We are sometimes put in a situation when we have to choose whether we need to be truthful for the sake of our readers, or cautious with what we put out about the brand we are meant to promote.
Would we prefer keeping silent about a brand's faulty products, services, ways, or even people, and just work with them behind the scenes so our followers would only know their positive attributes, and be unaware of the real score?
When we try to keep some things hidden from our readers, listeners or viewers, and just "cooperate" with the brands to work something out, when does it become different from connivance?
Would it help the brand more if we keep their image flawless, or would it be more impressive when they are like a Phoenix rising from the ashes because they made efforts to correct their unflattering products, services or ways based from our critical reviews? We believe it would it be more disappointing when our followers discover for themselves they've been fooled to believe an orchestrated or scripted promotional campaign.
Unfortunately, there would always be those who do not have the guts (or just prefer to state only the positive since the brand involved is an advertiser or client) to mention the negatives because they want to keep the relationship with the brand, PR or event organizer. Many are getting banned or prevented from being invited again because they were too honest with their reviews, or too vocal about how the events were handled, or how the organizers treated the people including the media or bloggers. Of course, event organizers would prefer those who only say positive stuff about the brands they manage, and avoid the critical reviewers.
Life as media or bloggers should never be a competition. Damn those who demand exclusives or those who ask for special privileges like they're kings and queens. We equally hate those who give in to these kind of requests. There should never be discrimination among media outfits or bloggers.
Somebody from the inside told us about the media outfit who demanded an arrangement that was unfair for other media outfits covering a certain event. From the outside, the people would think this media outfit has the best coverage and news about an event, but people were unaware that other media outfits were forbidden to be as comprehensive and real-time with the event coverage, and were restricted to release only limited output otherwise a 1 Million fine will be charged to those who disobey. If other media outfits don't sign, they may not be allowed entrance to cover the event.
The top and affluent media outfits would also often get the advantage of being treated better. This includes getting recognized or rewarded better, getting VIP seats, getting better food, perks and privileges. There would always be brands, or PRs of the brands, who think traditional media deserve better treatment than online or bloggers, and discriminate the capabilities of the lesser known media or blogging entities.
Incidentally, we believe we should not be posers who would only post the positive about everything. When we hide, ignore, or do not mention the negatives, we become part of the Fake News dilemma that contributes to the dissemination of a make-believe and crazy world.
But then again, this also goes the same to those who share fabricated or exaggerated negative news because they have ulterior motives other than spreading the real happenings.
We fool ourselves if we connive with brands, and hide the pitiful and deplorable truth about their products and services. But when we attempt to destroy a brand, or person, simply because they are a competition or we have personal hatred against certain individuals, we lower ourselves to pitiful levels.
Reality is all about the pros and cons, ups and downs, etc., of society. It is more believable and understandable if there are flaws. But it becomes a lot more deplorable when we make it serve an evil purpose.
A shout-out as well to those who attend events but report stories that are totally not related to the event. The intention of the invitees is to promote their brands or events, and not be used to gain access to celebrities for unrelated stories or features.
Those who fool and elude us by showing only what they want us to see are not really helping because they keep everyone half-blind, deaf and even mute. We help a brand more if we mention their mistakes and shortcomings, and offer suggestions for improvement. It is our social responsibility to take notice and act on all issues, no matter who is involved.
Life is not perfect. But it is all about being aware, engaged and involved in sharing only the real news. We all have stories to tell, and so don't let them be fictional. Don't oversell.
We could only become real heroes when we are entirely truthful, and not just seemingly cosplaying to project a heroic image. We can help the society more if we open everyone's eyes towards the truth before it is all too late for all of us.
If we are truly sincere, let our ultimate purpose in life be about changing the world by being truthful with ourselves and the people whom we tell our stories.
Ross is known as the Pambansang Blogger ng Pilipinas - An Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Professional by profession and a Social Media Evangelist by heart.
.jpg)
