Reply to this

The proposed "Right of Reply" law steps on the right of news media to publish what is fair and fitting by the industry's standards. By giving “aggrieved parties” the right to demand equal time and space on newspapers and television shows, the law effectively arrogates unto the “aggrieved parties” the right to mess around with a newspaper’s or TV show’s editorial policies.

So here's my suggestion to major media groups in case the bill, in its current incarnation, passes.

Day 1:
All major newspapers should carry the headline: "Nene Pimentel accused of beating up wife, abusing child." Somewhere below the headline is something about Monico Puentebella’s homosexual exploits in Sweden.

Of course these allegations are all false (as far as we know) so these blowhards invoke their right to reply law.

Day 2:
All the newspapers carry different headlines. Something like: Mike Arroyo is a big fat slob. The blowhards will not have enough time to craft a response to Day 1.

Day 3:
All the newspapers publish the response of the blowhards in their front pages. The headlines read something like: "I did not beat up my wife – Pimentel" and "I am not gay (not that there's anything wrong with that) – Puentebella."

But here’s the cool part. At the top of the page in heavy font, all the newspapers will announce: “For actual news that’s fit to print, see pages 2 and 3. Repeal the right to reply law.”

If they want to reply, let’s give them something to reply to.