Skip to main content

Dismissing an Article Because It was Written on Blogspot, WordPress, Etc.?

I guess one of the dumbest things I've run into on Facebook when I share my essays is, "Blogspot? WordPress? Is that a reliable source?" That's really a fallacy called Ad Hominem. That is choosing to attack me (the blogger) instead of the argument on Blogspot because I'm using a free domain

I share my articles written in Blogger for this reason--I don't like writing overly long comments. It's sometimes better to link to my links rather than type them so long on social media. Writing articles on my business blog and this blog prepares me to write a lot. I can choose long essays and short ones. I may need 1,000+ (or more) words to explain a topic. Sometimes, I need only a few words (like this one) to stress a point. In short, I use my blog posts like ready-to-go ammunition. 

Is my blog really suddenly, automatically fake news? FYI, I don't just write. I also do some Internet research. I even quote from some books like the late Lee Kuan Yew's book From Third World to First. I also read from news websites, academic websites (though I have to be careful about paid membership sites to avoid spending too much), and more.

I'd like to stress out that a person can get an impressive design, a yearly domain, etc., and still be giving out fake news mixed with the truth. Unfortunately, LKY even called the Philippines press to be rambunctious in his book From Third World to First when he said:

Ramos knew well the difficulties of trying to govern with strict American-style separation of powers. The senate had already defeated Mrs. Aquino's proposal to retain the American bases. The Philippines had a rambunctious press but it did not check corruption. Individual press reporters could be bought, as could many judges.

Would you really dismiss a valid argument on a free domain in exchange for a paid website full of rambunctious content? For all we know, the person using a free domain decided to go out there and get the information. The person may just be a hobby blogger so buying a domain might not be very practical. A blog is sometimes used to express ideals and share thoughts. Sure, it's not valid as an academic source. However, it can be used to automatically express views or to share thoughts without having to type ridiculously long comments.

Right now, I just write down my thoughts I don't intend to become some kind of expert. However, I do have my advocacy for constitutional reform in the Philippines. I'm also sharing my thoughts on shockers that I've encountered such as Francisco Juan G. Larrañaga's innocence or Hubert Jeffry Webb's innocence. I also want to share my thoughts on some random historical details. It's practicing my limited freedom of expression and freedom of the press. 

Sadly, some people still feel so high and mighty that they look down on those they call "just another blogger" or "minor, minor blogger". A degree, an award, etc. might be good but it's not a license to belittle people who are ordinary netizens. Even worse, the name-calling and bullying might show how awards and degrees may not be the best credibility. 

Popular posts from this blog

Nirvana Fallacy and the Die-Hard Defenders of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines

IMGUR The philosopher Voltaire (real name  François-Marie Aroue ) was said to have said, "Perfect is the enemy of good." To define the Nirvana fallacy, we can look at Logically Fallacious to help us define it: Description: Comparing a realistic solution with an idealized one , and discounting or even dismissing the realistic solution as a result of comparing to a “perfect world” or impossible standard, ignoring the fact that improvements are often good enough reason . Logical Form: X is what we have. Y is the perfect situation. Therefore, X is not good enough. Example #1: What’s the point of making drinking illegal under the age of 21?  Kids still manage to get alcohol. Explanation: The goal in setting a minimum age for drinking is to deter underage drinking, not abolish it completely.  Suggesting the law is fruitless based on its failure to abolish underage drinking completely, is fallacious. Example #2: What’s the point of living?  We’re all going to die anyway. Ex...

The Foolishness of Complaining About Stupid Voters and Stupid Candidates, While Insisting the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines is "So Perfect"

I was looking into the Facebook page of Butthurt Philippines . Honestly, it's easy to complain but what's the use of complaining if you reject the solutions? The art produced by its administrator shows some problems. However, if the administrator here believes that the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines is "perfect as it is" (and he seems to be throwing a "saving face" by saying it was just sarcasm, and I failed to detect it) then it's really something. It's one thing to keep complaining. Complaining can be good. However, what's the use of complaining if you reject the solutions. Even worse, complaining about the quality of candidates for the upcoming 2025 midterm elections , while still saying, "It's not the system it's the people!" Please, that kind of thinking has been refuted even by basic psychology and political science! It's really good to point out the three problems. Distractions? Check. Keeping people hopeless? ...

A Parliamentary Philippines with Mandatory Weekly Questioning Will Be Better Than Its Mandatory Yearly Presidential SONAs

Rappler I must admit that ignorance of the difference between the parliamentary system vs. the presidential system is there. Some people still insist on the myth that the first Marcos Administration headed by President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr.'s late father, Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr., was really a parliamentary system. In reality. the Marcos "parliamentary" years during the Martial Law era, were still presidential (read why  here ). A simple research would show that Cesar Virata was called by the late Lee Kuan Yew, as a non-starter and no leader. LKY would know how a real parliamentary system works. Sure, it's one thing that those who consider themselves Dilawan, voice their criticisms. However, the big problem of the Dilawans is their focus on political idolatry rather than solutions. I can talk with the Dilawans all they want that we do need to shift to the parliamentary system and some of them still cry foul, say that it'll be a repetition of the first Marcos Admi...

Why I Believe So Many Filipinos (Especially Boomers) Misunderstand (and Blindly Oppose) Charter Change

Okay, I'm no political analyst or historian. That doesn't mean I should just shut up and not share my opinion. I felt like I needed to publish this piece. This is where I want to examine another issue. I've noticed some people on Facebook are sharing the quotes of Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. Some would try to do Ad Hominem attacks on me because I'm no constitutionalist (which I admit that I'm not). Just because I'm not a constitutionalist, doesn't mean, that I can't quote from the experts . Do I really need a degree in law at one of those prestigious universities in the Philippines? Sadly, some people are supposedly smarter than me but are the ones spreading nonsense.  Understanding charter change We need to see the definition first to understand why so many Filipinos, especially boomers , are so against it. The Philippine Star   gives this definition of charter change: Charter change, simply, is the process of introducing amendments or revisions to the ...

What? The Aquinos Aren't Part of a Political Dynasty?!

  I was looking at the Mahal Ko Ang Pilipinas  (I Love the Philippines)  Facebook page, which made me laugh. This is what they wrote on their post saying that the Aquino Family isn't a political dynasty: THE AQUINO FAMILY IS NOT A POLITICAL DYNASTY 🇵🇭🎗 Pro-Duterte blogger Tio Moreno says that Bam Aquino is part of a political dynasty because the Aquino family is a political dynasty. But to me, this is not true. Why is it not true that the Aquino family is a political dynasty? 🤔 1. When Ninoy Aquino entered politics, none of his children joined him in his endeavors, and even his wife Cory did not join him in politics. 2. When Ninoy was assassinated in 1983, none of his children succeeded him in politics, not even his wife. But when the opposition and his supporters were looking to be the opposition's candidate for the presidency in the snap election called by Ferdie Marcos for 1986, his housewife Cory Cojuangco-Aquino was approached, encouraged or convinced by people t...