The Banning Of A Sports Journalist: The Snow Badua Incident

Last Friday, September 18, PBA commissioner Chito Narvasa (through a letter) banned sports journalist Snow Badua from covering or participating in the league’s games and activities.

This all-encompassing PBA ban seemed to have stemmed from Badua’s articles and tweets that accuse a certain PBA team governor of several inappropriate activities, including allegedly preventing several popular players from playing on the national team, railroading trades and players, and even having an affair with a popular model.

In what seems to be a relevant incident, the PBA beat reporter of Spin.ph, the media entity for which Mr. Badua writes, was denied permission to cover the practice sessions of the involved PBA governor’s team.

(For those who have not read the story, find it here: http://www.spin.ph/basketball/pba/news/pba-commissioner-chito-narvasa-bans-writer-snow-badua-from-pro-league-games-activities)

But this article isn’t about those issues. This article is about the freedom of the press, nay, the right of the press to shed light on issues that fall in the realm of the public interest.  

I have a couple of issues with this whole thing played out, mostly on the lack of clarity by which Commissioner Narvasa conducted his investigation.

The unsigned letter banning Snow Badua. Photo courtesy of hoops.ph

In Narvasa’s letter to Badua, he said that upon conducting an investigation, he concluded that the contents of Badua’s posts on Twitter were unfounded, and that they the “concoction of an evil and malicious mind”.

I would certainly like to hear more about how Commissioner Narvasa conducted his investigation.

Who were the people he talked to?

Did he get to hear from both sides (meaning the aggrieved PBA governor and Badua)?

Did he get statements from the personalities involved in the controversies (players who were allegedly stopped from joining the national team, players who were allegedly railroaded and even the popular model allegedly involved in an affair with the PBA governor)?

How did he come to the conclusion that allegations reported by Mr. Badua were the “concoction of an evil and malicious mind”?

Were any of the allegations raised by Mr. Badua ever addressed?

Really, which aspect of Mr. Badua’s actions did Commissioner Narvasa find irresponsible and deplorable?

Reporting on the alleged affair of a popular model and a PBA governor? But that's Mr. Badua's job, to report on the actions of sports personalities, and that only happened after the popular model in question talked about it in a radio program that Mr. Badua wasn’t even a part of? Yes, Mr. Badua did draw conclusions from that interview, however anyone who listened to the interview or read the transcript would have to admit that the model wasn’t particularly subtle of the identity of the PBA governor.

In fact, the actual interviewer, DJ Mo Twister, has gone on record to say that the model specifically mentioned the PBA governor’s name about “15 times” (link here: http://kickerdaily.com/reporter-snow-badua-banned-from-pba-for-writing-about-execs-alleged-affair-with-ring-girl/). That’s a hell of a lot of times, which would make Commissioner Narvasa’s statement that this alleged affair has “no factual basis” kinda stupid.

Why? Uhm, there’s an actual witness (and willing participant) saying that it is a fact, that the affair did happen. If Commissioner Narvasa wants to kill this issue, he should be attacking the statement of the popular model, not the fact that Mr. Badua reported it or drew conclusions from it.

Also in his letter to Mr. Badua, Commissioner Narvasa said “Your irresponsible and deplorable actions reveal an evil intention to gain support from the legions of fans of 3 teams of the PBA in order to create embarrassment, incite anger and provoke hatred on Mr. Chua”. Was he referring to Mr. Badua’s acts of writing about the said PBA governor threatening players and scaring them into not joining the national team? Or his writing about the railroading of players in trade and contract scenarios? Because I’m totally confused which actions he considers irresponsible and deplorable.

From Mr. Badua’s tweets, it seems he has spoken to the head of the SMC corporation, who has professed ignorance as to the decision of the players on his teams to not join the national team. This has been bolstered by tweets of employees of SMC who say their CEO is very “hands off” when it comes to team management, leaving the day-to-day operations to his designated PBA governors. If Mr. Badua did indeed speak to the SMC head, then his allegations are not baseless, in which case Commissioner Narvasa’s decision is wrong. If Mr. Badua did not speak to the SMC head, then the easiest way to lay this issue to rest is with the truth.

At the end of it all, the banning of the press is always a dangerous thing. It is an action commonly favored by dictators, of those whose best interests do not lie with the airing of the truth.

Some may argue that a press system with no rules will also leave us open to abuse and the destruction of reputations, all on a writer’s whim. That’s certainly true, as I personally do not subscribe to freedom without responsibility.

That is why the law provides people with legal options for acts of journalistic abuse. In fact, as a budding journalist in the 90s, I remember well then President Aquino filing, and winning, a libel case against Philippine Star columnist Luis Beltran.

If Mr. Badua did indeed air falsehoods to destroy the said PBA governor’s reputation, then shouldn’t the legally mandated action be the best solution to this scenario?

Banning Snow Badua just makes Commissioner Narvasa look like someone’s vindictive puppet and the said PBA governor guilty as hell.