Freedom of Expression or Entitlement of Expression?

“Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not to their facts.” This quote by Daniel
Patrick Moynihan was used by a lot of people to tell us that we are entitled to our own opinions,
but not to our facts for facts need evidence that will support its claim. Nowadays, expressing one’s
opinion on social media has become a social issue among the Filipinos. Whenever someone
expresses his/her opinion and a particular someone disagrees on him/her and finds his/her claim
ridiculous, that someone who expressed his/her thoughts would immediately be regarded as bobo
or ignorant. Because the government in the Philippines is democratic and freedom of speech is
highly encouraged, because we the citizens would be the one to be served by our leaders, we have
been abusing the use of freedom of speech. Expressing someone’s opinion or thoughts has become
a problem for people in the media or what we call netizens will argue over the topic that actually
involves degrading someone. One of the remarkable lines that Pres. Rodrigo Duterte told the
people in the State of the Nation Address (SONA) was: “Honestly, I have identified the enemy
who dumped us into this quagmire we are in. I have met the enemy face to face. And sadly, the
enemy is us… we are our own tormentors. We are our own demons.” Although Filipinos are still
in a state where many Filipinos who truly care for the country are fighting and speaking up for the
masses, but if not everyone agrees to help the, their fight will all go into senselessness and ruin.
Now, if this Filipino trait has become toxic and if this continues, Filipinos, will be the ones to
destroy the Philippines.
This issue can be expounded by using the Structural-Functionalism, Theory of Rational
Choice, and Institutionalism. Cessare Beccaria, the founder of the Rational Choice Theory
(Although Adam Smith was the one credited for this theory) states that this theory models
individual decision-making. One of the assumptions of the Rational Choice Theory is the structure
of preference. In business, this can be applied to investors who prefer one stock over another
because they believe that the stock they chose will offer a higher return. In this social issue,
whenever elections are coming, people choose their candidate based on their platforms,
educational background or if he/she had ever been involved in public issues. For example, a lot of
Filipinos argued over the topic of who would be the better leader between the senatorial candidates
(Diokno, Gutoc, Marcos, Bato etc). The youth prefer Chel Diokno over Imee Marcos because they
believe that Diokno will be a better leader, given that he is a human rights lawyer, anti-death
penalty, and a graduate of University of the Philippines and Northern Illinois University. On the
other hand, Marcos was viewed as a liar because her edicational attainment remains unclear up to
now. But given this circumstance, Marcos was still able to win the elections while Diokno lost.
This is because of the structure of preference. Based on the reports of ABS-CBN, GMA and other
news sources, a lot of Filipinos still voted for Marcos because they believe that the Liberal Party
where Diokno was included are dilawans and are only good with words. This is why they preferred
Marcos over Diokno.

In Structural functionalism, if you will look at the bigger picture, the manifest function of
the entitlement of opinions in the Philippines is spreading social awareness. In this way, not only
the people inside the government can deal with such problems, citizens in the society can be also
involved and spread awareness to his/her fellow citizens. People will also see or hear other
opinions and perspectives. Another fact is that people will have a wider understanding about the
issue because they will learn more about depth of the issue. However, the latent function of this
problem is that citizens will start to argue over the issue that might lead to cyberbullying, and
include red herring and ad hominem. Giving such opinions might also lead to misunderstandings
of the problem or might mislead us from the truth. Institutionalism: According to Aritle III, Section
4 of the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of Philippines. No law shall be passed abridging the
freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble
and petition the government for redress of grievances. Therefore, the government has made a law
wherein we, the citizens are entitled or allowed to freely express our opinions on anomalies in our
country. With this, you can infer that a lot of people have actually violated that law, and some
people even got cyberbullied for expressing their opinions. Even though this is not one of the
intended consequences of our freedom to express what we think, we can’t deny that this right
actually added up to toxicity. Lastly, in institutionalism, one of its branches is the informal
institution. This branch includes our parents, and the church. These informal institutions teach us
the concept of morality and ethics. Because of these concepts, we were able to support our claims
and perspectives whenever we express our insights in a particular issue.