On the Sale of the Manila Times

A tragic chapter in the life of The Manila Times is about to close. It is officially called an asset sale. In truth, it is death by corporate strangulation of a newspaper with an independent editorial staff. In fact, it unfolds after a group of persons closely identified with President Estrada, has allegedly acquired--or is conspiring to acquire, buy into or buy out--several print and broadcast media agencies.

By all indications, the asset sale of The Manila Times is part of an insidious effort by this group, acting supposedly in the name and on behalf of the administration, to tame a critical press, through the backdoor. This seems to be privatized harassment and marginalization of an independent press. We have, fellow journalists, a crisis in the making in the Philippine media. I earnestly hope it does not threaten our democracy to serious disrepair.

A newspaper is a public trust.

The Constitution upholds the freedom of the press as a protected freedom that should not--never--be abridged by prior restraint, threat of subsequent punishment, curbs on access to information, or controls on the free flow and dissemination of news. Philippine laws prescribe that only Filipinos--not Americans nor any foreigners--may own and operate newspapers, radio and television.

Some facts have now been confirmed:

1. Ms. Katrina Legarda is coming in as publisher of The Manila Times, supposedly representing a section of the Roces family, the original owners of the newspaper.

   But on television last night, Ms. Legarda said that the company that was to buy into The Times has not yet been organized. She said she spoke to two Roces family members, Mr. Antonio Roces--who would come in as chairman of the board of the company yet to be born-- and Eddie Roces. But Ms. Legarda added that she had only initial discussions with the two gentlemen, and that "we have not been able to talk about it in full... nothing much has been done as of yesterday (Sunday, 18 July 1999).

2. Mr. Antonio Roces, for his part, told the Sarimanok News Network yesterday that Ms. Legarda merely asked him to assist in finding people who could help set up the new group that will buy The Manila Times. Mr. Antonio Roces told the Inquirer on Monday that Ms. Legarda assured him that "her financier was credible."

   Interviewed today by The Times, Mr. Antonio Roces said that he has not seen any incorporation papers, there is no corporation to speak of, he does not know any of the parties or investors, no names have been mentioned, and that it is only Ms. Legarda who knows all the answers to these questions. He said she is the one with the ball.

3. Mr. Joaquin (Joaquinito) Roces Jr., a son of the late lamented Don Joaquino "Chino" Roces and elder brother of Eddie, said that he had "nothing to do with the sale." Very frankly, Joaquinito said the problem of the Roceses is "Where will we get the money (to buy The Manila Times)?" On television Monday night, Mr. Joaquinito Roces said that as early as two years ago, he has been trying to buy The Times but that his proposal did not fly with the Gokongweis, the family that owns and is now selling the paper. He said he was surprised to hear that yesterday, the asset sale of The Times to a section of the Roces family was almost a done deal. Today, Mr. Joaquinito Roces told The Times that he is concerned about the propriety of the asset sale because Ms. Legarda is supposedly not the right Roces who should get back the newspaper.

In various interviews, Mr. Antonio Roces and Mr. Joaquinito Roces have separately made two similar statements:

1. That they do not know as yet the identities of the other investors and buyers of The Manila Times.
2. If Mr. Mark Jimenez would be among the investors, they would not join the takeover team.

Mr. Antonio Roces said that his acceptance of Ms. Legarda's offer to join the takeover team would depend on "the credibility of the new owner." As far as Jimenez is concerned, Mr. Antonio Roces said: "I wouldn't consider him a credible owner. I wouldn't be comfortable sitting in the same board with him."

Some details, according to various sources, are telling, a cause for alarm. Mr. Joaquinito Roces had admitted that his family does not have enough money to buy The Manila Times. The estate of the late Don Chino Roces is tied up in litigation.

The figure that has been floated is anywhere form P50 million to P100 million. This amount excludes as yet the cost of running the newspaper which would require at least another P30 million a year. The amount excludes too millions of pesos for capital outlay to actually start operations.

Don Chino Roces, the man who inspired The Manila Times' tradition of independent journalism, must be turning in his grave. His son Eddie has supposedly agreed to join the takeover team without as much disclosing the sources of the money that will be used to buy the newspaper. Mr. Eddie Roces, who sits on the board of ABC Channel 5 as president, is supposedly coming as a board member of The Manila Times. This would place him in a real conflict of interest situation.

Why the Roces family is retaking The Manila Times at this time of short sales, even shorter ad revenues, with not enough money of their own, with no promise of return on investment, and with a President and his friends almost totally intolerant of an independent press is the big question. With what or with whose money they will buy back The Manila Times is the deep, dark secret.

Let's go to the woman who holds the key that would unravel this secret. Ms. Katrina Legarda, a lawyer, is supposedly coming in as publisher of The Manila Times. She is the leader of the returning Roceses. She has told friends that in the Philippines today, what we have is virtual martial law with President Estrada as virtual dictator.

Ms. Legarda has been a good lawyer. She has successfully defended, as an associate, journalists Max Soliven and the late Louie Beltran in the libel suit filed against the Philippine Star in 1987 by then President Corazon C. Aquino. She was one of the women lawyers who obtained justice in 1997 for the 11-year-old girl who was raped by Zamboanga City Rep. Romeo Jalosjos. But Ms. Legarda had also been a political partisan. In 1992, she ran for senator, and lost, under the banner of the Nationalist People's Coalition party of Marcos crony Eduardo Cojuangco Jr. The same party fielded Joseph Estrada for vice president in 1992, and helped bankroll Joseph Estrada's epic bid for the presidency in May 1998.

Ms. Legarda had also organized and operated a public-relations outfit with her close friend, Ms. Marivic Rufino, who also dabbles in column-writing. In an interview with the Sunday Inquirer Magazine in March 1997, Ms. Legarda had said: "I have absolutely no direction in life. I don't seek out cases but when they drop on my lap, I do the best I can."

Now that the case of The Manila Times has dropped on her lap, it seems fair to implore Ms. Legarda to do the best she can to set a direction, and clarify, the situation for us, the 180 employees of The Manila Times.

This morning over radio, Ms. Legarda said that all that her group wants is to buy the trademark name of The Manila Times but that she does not yet have the money to acquire its assets, much less to run and operate the newspaper. Ms. Legarda as a mother of three kids herself would appreciate my grave concern that her wild, seemingly whimsical foray into journalism would send so many workers jobless, and their children and families, hopeless.

Let me spell out a few background details surrounding this, perhaps the most shaky, the most uncertain, the most mysterious 'done deal" we've ever heard of.

For months now, since the IMPSA story in February 1999 caught The Manila Times in the vortex of crisis--on account of President Estrada's libel suit and an apology by The Times' president--the name that had always cropped up as the man who wants to buy The Times is that of Mark Jimenez, President Estrada's anointed "corporate genius."

Mr. Jimenez reportedly likes to call himself an M & A (Merger and Acquisition) artist. From last May in various newspaper columns, his name had cropped up as the buyer of--or the man who wants to buy--The Manila Times. In other forums, Mr. Jimenez had openly discussed his plan to buy

The Manila Times since the days of the IMPSA story.

If all the editors of The Times had resigned and walked out on the paper then, the newspaper would have closed outright, and been delivered on a silver platter to Mr. Jimenez or other such interested buyers. Clearly, the decision of The Times editors to stay with the paper, despite the backlash triggered by the IMPSA story crisis, stalled the paper's death by corporate strangulation.

Between the IMPSA story crisis and today's supposed asset sale of The Times, many journalists have heard and learned that a group of persons closely associated with the President has started to buy into or invest in several other media agencies.

Curiously, too, one of the lawyers who represents Mr. Jimenez is also now identified with the group led by Ms. Legarda which is buying into The Times. There is no allegation here of any unlawful, illegal, irregular deed that has been committed by anyone as yet. The laws may be stretched, and the deals may be kept secret and paperless, for sure. But a corporate takeover of media agencies by a group of people identified with, and beholden to, the political party in power, defeats the very spirit of the Constitution and the freedom of the press.

Corporate takeovers of media agencies of this sort would redound, in fact, to control of the media by the party in power, through the backdoor. Is it Mr. Jimenez's money that is buying The Times? Are their investors genuine Filipino citizens? Is there no foreign money at all involved in this deal? Mr. Jimenez has vigorously and promptly denied that he is putting in money in The Times' asset sale. If his lawyers are clever, Mr. Jimenez's name, or that of any other questionable investors, will not appear in any of the papers that will cover the asset sale in The Times. The burden of proof that they're not buying The Times with Mark Jimenez's money now lies with the Roces group, in particular Ms. Legarda. Transparency and disclosure--this is the minimum obligation the Legarda-led team of buyers must fulfill to deserve rightful claim to run an operate The Times, or for that matter, any other newspaper.

It is important to stress that corporate takeover as a scheme to tame the media runs in parallel course to the organized pullout of ads in another critical newspaper, the Philippine Daily Inquirer. Midway in the discussions of The Times' asset sale, the new owners made a claim that by September, The Manila Times would be awash in ads. Will the ads pulled out from the Inquirer be diverted to The Manila Times, once the new owners take control?

An ad pullout by a singular company from a media agency is a reasonable exercise of free choice, a fair business practice. But an organized or synchronized ad pullout from critical newspapers by a group of government financial institutions--and companies owned by a group of persons closely identified with a political party--is a business practice that is unfair because it is cloaked in partisanship.

Conversely, an organized or synchronized diversion of ads to newspapers that are perceived to be friendly to the party in power, by the same group of persons acting in concert, smacks of a conspiracy. In Latin America, a region familiar to Mr. Jimenez, media agencies have suffered and soared too on account of corporate shakedowns by politicians in power, assisted by their corporate cronies.

The asset sale of The Times, the ad pullout buffeting the Inquirer, a sense of drift and acquiescence on the part of media owners and editors, paint an alarming portrait of an independent press in peril in the Philippines. Clearly, the situation highlights the strategic issue of ownership as a key factor in safeguarding, or diminishing, the freedom of the press. Some press proprietors do not prove themselves brave enough to deserve independent newspapers. Others do not show themselves transparent enough to deserve the public trust vested in owning a newspaper.

To be sure, President Estrada and his deputies carry a tremendous burden on their shoulders, and must forthwith deliver results on their many promises. But they would be wrong to think that a critical press is part of the problem, and not a part of the solution. The press merely presents real problems in their most acute forms. They could pacify, paralyze or close all critical newspapers but they could never just wish or whisk away all the problems, and the lack of results.