GRIPO, ALLEN P.

AM20

MEDIA103

On October 30, 1908, the bilingual Spanish-Tagalog daily El Renacimiento/Muling

Pagsilang published the editorial "Aves de Rapiña" (Birds of Prey), which provoked a historic libel

lawsuit (Ocampo, 2019) The editorial "Aves De Rapiña," which translates to "Birds of Prey," has

sparked debate concerning its fairness and veracity. The editorial, which ran in a local newspaper,

accuses a number of well-known businessmen of unethical behavior and refers to them as "birds

of prey" who feed on the neighborhood's resources. The article goes into detail about the business

people’s alleged illegal behaviors, which include bribery, embezzlement, and tax avoidance.

The statement referenced to a US official who was accused of abusing his office to profit

personally from the nation's resources (Alas, 2020). Dean Worcester felt the need to sue the

publication even though his name wasn't included. The journal was forced to pay a sizable quantity

of money in return, which forced it to discontinue publication. It is up to the reader to decide

whether or not this editorial was defamatory. Libel is the act of releasing false and derogatory

information about a person or organization to harm their reputation. The businessmen in question

may argue that the editorial's charges are fraudulent and will hurt their importance in this case. But

before evaluating whether the editorial is defamatory, the proof and information must be

considered. The editorial would not be considered defamatory if its assertions were proven true

and supported by evidence. Yet, the editorial may be defamatory if the accusations are based solely

on rumors or suppositions. The courts will ultimately decide whether the editorial was defamatory

or not. Concerned businesspeople may sue the publication and the editorial's author for damages
for reputational loss. The court's conclusion on whether the editorial's assertions are factual and

whether they were written with malice aforethought will be based on the facts presented by both

sides.

Finally, the "Aves De Rapia" editorial has sparked debate concerning its objectivity and

integrity. It is up to the courts to decide whether or not it constitutes libel depending on the

evidence presented, as this is a matter of opinion and interpretation but Worcester used his power

and connection to win against the case. The prey continue to make efforts to fight this unjust power,

and they are sometimes successful. Yet, like in the renowned editorial, the delicious victory is

short before the eagle returns to its carnage (Savecrow, 2016) It is crucial to consider the facts and

evidence when assessing whether the editorial was libelous and the potential harm that false and

destructive assertions can do to a person's or organization's reputation.

 REFERENCES

Alas, P. (2020, January 13). Aves de Rapiña libel case. EL FILIPINISMO. Retrieved

March 4, 2023, from https://pepealas.wordpress.com/tag/aves-de-rapina-libel-case/

Ocampo, A. R. (2019, August 2). 'birds of prey'. INQUIRER.net. Retrieved March 4,

2023, from https://opinion.inquirer.net/123002/birds-of-prey

Savecrow. (2016, February 21). What I can say about birds of prey. Tumblr. Retrieved

March 4, 2023, from https://savecrow.tumblr.com/post/139704649489/what-i-can-say-about-

birds-of-prey