CHARACTERISTICS OF EDITORIAL WRITING

An editorial is an article that presents the newspaper's opinion on an issue. It reflects the majority vote of the editorial
board, the governing body of the newspaper made up of editors and business managers. It is usually unsigned. Much
in the same manner of a lawyer, editorial writers build on an argument and try to persuade readers to think the same
way they do. Editorials are meant to influence public opinion, promote critical thinking, and sometimes cause people
to take action on an issue. In essence, an editorial is an opinionated news story.

Editorials have:
1. Introduction, body and conclusion like other news stories
2. An objective explanation of the issue, especially complex issues
3. A timely news angle
4. Opinions from the opposing viewpoint that refute directly the same issues the writer addresses
5. The opinions of the writer delivered in a professional manner. Good editorials engage issues, not personalities and
refrain from name-calling or other petty tactics of persuasion.
6. Alternative solutions to the problem or issue being criticized. Anyone can gripe about a problem, but a good
editorial should take a pro-active approach to making the situation better by using constructive criticism and giving
solutions.
7. A solid and concise conclusion that powerfully summarizes the writer's opinion. Give it some punch.

Four Types of Editorials Will:

1. Explain or interpret: Editors often use these editorials to explain the way the newspaper covered a sensitive or
controversial subject. School newspapers may explain new school rules or a particular student-body effort like a food
drive.
2. Criticize: These editorials constructively criticize actions, decisions or situations while providing solutions to the
problem identified. Immediate purpose is to get readers to see the problem, not the solution.
3. Persuade: Editorials of persuasion aim to immediately see the solution, not the problem. From the first paragraph,
readers will be encouraged to take a specific, positive action. Political endorsements are good examples of editorials
of persuasion.
4. Praise: These editorials commend people and organizations for something done well. They are not as common as
the other three.

Writing an Editorial
1. Pick a significant topic that has a current news angle and would interest readers.
2. Collect information and facts; include objective reporting; do research
3. State your opinion briefly in the fashion of a thesis statement
4. Explain the issue objectively as a reporter would and tell why this situation is important
5. Give opposing viewpoint first with its quotations and facts
6. Refute (reject) the other side and develop your case using facts, details, figures, quotations. Pick apart the other
side's logic.
7. Concede a point of the opposition — they must have some good points you can acknowledge that would make you
look rational.
8. Repeat key phrases to reinforce an idea into the reader's minds.
9. Give a realistic solution(s) to the problem that goes beyond common knowledge. Encourage critical thinking and
pro-active reaction.
10. Wrap it up in a concluding punch that restates your opening remark (thesis statement).
11. Keep it to 500 words; make every work count; never use "I"

Parts of an editorial
Although people write editorials on a wide range of topics, most have the same basic components. All editorials need
a clear stance and details to support that perspective. Good persuasive articles have the following elements:
 Introduction: The introduction builds a reader's interest in the topic and gives an overview of the issue.
 Argument: The argument presents your opinion along with reasons why the audience should agree with you.
 Evidence: The evidence supports your argument with facts, research or anecdotes.
 Counterargument: All editorial writers should establish credibility by presenting a fair review of the
perspectives involved. While a praising editorial might be mostly positive with a brief reference to an issue, a
critical editorial needs to address the opposing perspective directly.
 Refutation: After sharing the counter-argument with a reader, the writer must explain why that argument is
not accurate or relevant. Refuting the counterargument allows you to promote your point of view while still
seeming fair.
 Conclusion: In the final paragraph of your editorial, summarize your point of view and remind the reader
why they should care about this issue.
A Sample Structure
I. Lead with an Objective Explanation of the Issue/Controversy.
Include the five W's and the H. (Members of Congress, in effort to reduce the budget, are looking to cut funding from
public television. Hearings were held …)

 Pull in facts and quotations from the sources which are relevant.
 Additional research may be necessary.

II. Present Your Opposition First.

As the writer you disagree with these viewpoints. Identify the people (specifically who oppose you. (Republicans feel
that these cuts are necessary; other cable stations can pick them; only the rich watch public television.)

 Use facts and quotations to state objectively their opinions.

 Give a strong position of the opposition. You gain nothing in refuting a weak position.
III. Directly Refute The Opposition's Beliefs.

You can begin your article with transition. (Republicans believe public televison is a "sandbox for the rich."
However, statistics show most people who watch public television make less than $40,000 per year.)

 Pull in other facts and quotations from people who support your position.
 Concede a valid point of the opposition which will make you appear rational, one who has considered all the
options (fiscal times are tough, and we can cut some of the funding for the arts; however, …).

IV. Give Other, Original Reasons/Analogies

In defense of your position, give reasons from strong to strongest order. (Taking money away from public television
is robbing children of their education …)

 Use a literary or cultural allusion that lends to your credibility and perceived intelligence (We should render
unto Caesar that which belongs to him …)

V. Conclude With Some Punch.

Give solutions to the problem or challenge the reader to be informed. (Congress should look to where real wastes
exist — perhaps in defense and entitlements — to find ways to save money. Digging into public television's pocket
hurts us all.)

 A quotation can be effective, especially if from a respected source

 A rhetorical question can be an effective concluder as well (If the government doesn't defend the interests of
children, who will?)

Despite challenges, crusade for gender equality continues

THE observance of Women's Month this March puts in sharp focus the need to acknowledge gender equality as more
than just a catalyst for improving the lives and enhancing the rights of women.

In the 1960s, the feminist movement swept across the United States, inciting women to break out of their traditional
roles, assert their right to reproductive choices and fight sexual discrimination in the workplace.

The male-dominated corporate establishment closed ranks against the growing tide of women's liberation. But the
writing was on the wall, and it was just a matter of time before the walls of gender-based bias began to crumble.

The feminist movement has since morphed into a crusade for women empowerment. The challenges facing women
during the 1960s were basically the same ones confronting women today but on a much bigger scale.
Despite notable gains in gender equality, more women than men around the world struggle with economic, political
and social burdens.

Based on figures compiled by UN Women, the United Nations agency dedicated to gender equality and women
empowerment, the outlook for the world's female population does not look promising at all. One in every 10 women
is living in extreme poverty. If the trend is not reversed, by 2030, 342.4 million women and girls will still be living on
less than $2.15 a day.

Women are less likely than men to have access to financial institutions or have a bank account.

Men still make up the majority of the labor force, and women with children have a smaller chance of landing jobs.

In the agricultural sector, women are relegated to seasonal, informal, part-time and low-wage work with limited
access to social protection, UN Women said. Women farmers are edged out by their male counterparts when it comes
to land ownership.

The gender gap extends to entrepreneurship, with women facing more barriers than men do in starting businesses.

Women also "shoulder a disproportionate share of unpaid care and domestic work," according to UN Women. The
inequality is particularly glaring among "low-income, migrant and racialized groups, who "perform more than three-
quarters of unpaid care and domestic work."

The list goes on.

Interestingly, the Philippines has managed to go against the global trend.

PREPARE FOR WAR

The tension between China and the Philippines in the West Philippine Sea has again accelerated with the increasing
harassment of Philippine ships. The Philippines’ strong stand against these Chinese incursions has elicited support
from other countries, especially Western powers who are also determined to stop further Chinese expansion.
In a recent state visit to Australia, President Bongbong Marcos was invited to speak to the Australian Parliament.
Although there were protests because of human rights abuses in the Philippines, this again is a reminder that the West
pays more attention to its allies against a common enemy.
This is reminiscent of the martial law years when the American presidents supported the government of President
Marcos Sr. because he was seen as an ally in the fight against communism.
Any analysis of the current situation raises the urgent question of whether this tension could lead to accidental
conflicts which could lead to armed conflict. There is a high degree of probability that this will eventually happen.
The scariest scenario is whether these accidental armed conflicts will lead not only to a war, but worse, to a nuclear
war. For students of geopolitics, history shows that a US-Chinese war will not go nuclear. In the more than seven
decades of conflicts since World War II which included at least one nuclear power, nuclear weapons have never been
used.

During the Cold War, the two nuclear powers, USA and Russia, engaged in wars in Africa, Asia and even Latin
America. These wars incurred high human and military costs such as the ones in Korea and Vietnam. However,
despite this bloody and protracted war, the nuclear powers avoided the use of nuclear weapons. Today, Russia, a
nuclear power, in its war with Ukraine, has avoided using nuclear weapons even though Russia has paid an enormous
price in this conflict.
A geopolitical explanation for this is that the idea of mutually assured destruction will deter the use of nuclear
weapons even during a war. It is still very possible, however, that a great power conflict between United States and
China will still take place.
There are many ways that a war between China and the United States could start. The first scenario would involve the
Philippines. Geopolitical experts call the Philippines as part of an island chain from Japan through Taiwan. This chain
of islands starts north of Japan through Taiwan, the Philippines and part of Indonesia. It is called an island chain
because it parallels the coastline of mainland China and prevents Beijing from having easy access to the Pacific
Ocean and the Indian Ocean.
China has claimed ownership of the entire South China Sea, which is being disputed by most other countries
including the Philippines, Japan and the United States. This is the area where accidental conflicts between China and
the alliance of which the Philippines is part could result in accidental conflict and could lead to war.
The second scenario is an outright invasion by China of Taiwan, which Beijing has continuously called as part of its
territory. The victory of the Democratic Party (DPP) in Taiwan’s recent elections has escalated the tension. DPP is
perceived by China to be pro-independence. Xi Jinping has said on several official occasions that China will invade
Taiwan.
The third possible scenario is the result of tensions between North Korea on one hand and South Korea and the
United States on the other. The ruler of North Korea, Kim Jong Un, is an unpredictable ruler and possesses nuclear
weapons. The possibility, however remote, of a nuclear conflict exists in the Korean Peninsula. If fighting happens in
Korea, the United States which has troops stationed there will probably send more reinforcements. Beijing at this
point will probably decide that they are obligated to assist their ally, North Korea.
The fourth scenario would be a war between India and China along their shared border. There have already been
minor clashes on this border. If India were to become the victim of more significant Chinese aggression, the United
States and its allies would be compelled to defend its Indian ally.
Under these four different scenarios, China and the United States would end up in a direct armed conflict. While it is
true that the possibility of a nuclear war is very low, there is the very high likelihood that the conflict is unlikely to
end quickly. Note that the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine is already more than two years old.
The Philippines must therefore prepare itself for the likelihood of a protracted war. This war would incur extremely
high cost in global trade, transportation, energy infrastructure and communication networks. This would
unnecessarily impose a strain on human populations throughout the world.
If this happens, the Philippines would need to divert its resources to its national defense at the expense of funding for
needed development. The Philippines must realize the effect of a great power war that would last for many months or
years and must prepare to have the staying power in what could be a long war.

SLAP ON WRIST
On Aug. 2 last year, 17-year-old Jerhode “Jemboy” Baltazar was chased by a police team in Navotas and then shot
dead. Why? The policemen later admitted that they mistook Baltazar for a murder suspect they were pursuing. But
they could not explain why they shot to kill instead of disabling the unarmed teenager. Baltazar was repairing a
fishing boat with a friend, and fell into the water when he was shot.
The policemen left the wounded teen in the water instead of rushing him to a hospital. It took several hours before
Baltazar was fished out of Manila Bay, by which time he was dead. He had two gunshot wounds. Clearly there was
no intent on the part of the police team to save him. As Baltazar’s bereaved mother lamented yesterday following the
court ruling, her son was shot like a dog.
Yet Judge Pedro Dabu Jr. of the Navotas Regional Trial Court’s Branch 286 lowered the murder charge against the six
policemen to homicide, convicted only one and ordered the release of four others because their four-month sentence
for illegal discharge of firearm was deemed to have been served during their detention while on trial.Staff Sgt. Gerry
Maliban was sentenced to no more than six years in prison for homicide. A sixth policeman was acquitted.
The murder charge was lowered to homicide reportedly because the policemen were merely performing their duty. If
shooting to kill is the regular way members of the Philippine National Police perform their duty, the country is in
deep trouble. And it’s little wonder that egregious abuses were committed by PNP members in the conduct of the war
on drugs during the administration of Rodrigo Duterte.
At least the Department of Justice sees Baltazar’s case differently. The DOJ has vowed to “exhaust all legal
remedies” to secure a murder conviction, arguing that certain elements were ignored in the court ruling, including
reasonableness of the police action, conspiracy and intent to kill. The case is expected to be elevated to the Court of
Appeals.
A police official said the case would serve as a warning to PNP members to follow guidelines in pursuing suspects
and neutralizing threats. In fact the opposite could happen as a result of the slap on the wrist for the killing of an
innocent teenager. The decision of the Navotas court rewards shooting first – even shooting to kill – and asking
questions later.
 EDITORIAL - Cha-cha not a priority
As members of a panel in the House of Representatives launched public consultations on constitutional amendments,
President Marcos said Charter change is not a priority of his administration. Several of his allies in the Senate, where
a similar effort has been initiated at the committee level, supported the President’s statement and said yesterday that
Cha-cha is “not really” in their agenda.While Congress is free to proceed with the Cha-cha initiative, presidential
support plays a critical role in the effort. This was evident in the previous administration, when the Cha-cha initiative
lost steam after then president Rodrigo Duterte dropped his campaign promise of pushing for a shift to federalism. A
draft Charter was presented to the House, which promptly produced its own version that omitted a key amendment in
the draft: regulation of political dynasties.
This time, the House initiative ostensibly focuses on amending restrictive economic provisions that are deterring
investments. President Marcos, however, said making the country more investment-friendly could be done without
touching the Constitution. The President issued the statement on his flight back to Manila from Tokyo, where he said
Japanese businessmen had expressed interest in investing or expanding their operations in the Philippines.
Key concerns raised by investors can in fact be addressed without Cha-cha. These include red tape and issues with
ease of doing business, inadequate infrastructure, high power costs, uncertainty in upholding the sanctity of contracts,
unpredictable regulatory environment and the overall weakness of the rule of law
Several laws have been passed to cut red tape and promote ease of doing business – an area where the country trails
many of its neighbors. But much of this problem today lies in local government units. Many LGUs all the way down
to barangays have placed thick layers of mostly redundant requirements and fees that deter all types of businesses,
from big-ticket investments to micro enterprises including backyard egg production. Even the supply and price
problems in agricultural commodities are being blamed partly on red tape and bad governance at the local level.
Addressing this problem does not call for Cha-cha.
Some of the restrictive economic provisions in the Constitution have already been remedied by legislation. Congress
still has a lot on its plate to further improve the country’s competitiveness as an investment destination. It should not
be distracted from these urgent tasks.

EDITORIAL - Cha-cha fast break

If gathering the required number of signatures nationwide for a people’s initiative to amend the Constitution proves
so easy, with the threshold allegedly already met even before the month is over and a nationwide plebiscite planned
for July, the nation can be sure it will not be the last time that this mode of amending the basic law of the land will be
employed.

And the nation can be sure that it can quickly deteriorate into a bad habit, based on the whims of whoever or
whichever group is in power. Amendments can be reversed with every change of leadership, and reversed again, with
plebiscites not even coinciding with elections. If provisions can be changed with such speed, simply through
legislative action, even annual amendments are possible.

Like many rules in this country, and business contracts especially those involving the government, constitutional
provisions can quickly lose their integrity if these can be changed at the drop of a hat, or as quickly as the funding for
a signature campaign is rolled out. Yet this is what proponents of the ongoing fast break for Charter change are doing.

President Marcos is correct in saying that the 1987 Constitution “was not written for a globalized world.” But the
means is just as important as the end in making the Charter attuned to globalization. It cannot be done through
deception, or by buying support, as Cha-cha critics say the proponents are doing. An amended Constitution cannot
simply be presented to the nation, with the people being told to sign blindly on the dotted line, and to just read what
they signed after the fact.

Making the country more competitive in a globalized world also requires so much more than just easing foreign
ownership restrictions. Local business groups and foreign chambers alike have long pointed to the problems that
make the Philippines unattractive to investments, and these have nothing to do with constitutional restrictions.

Apart from inadequate infrastructure and high power costs, the investors have long cited red tape and ineffectual rules
and processes for ease of doing business, the failure to enforce the sanctity of contracts, a weak and compromised
regulatory environment and judicial system, and uncoordinated business rules of national agencies and local
government units. Simply acquiring right of way even for a critical project can take years.
These problems require resolute action and cannot be cured by instant Cha-cha. A country’s constitution can always
use amendments, but the objective is just as important as the method for its attainment.

EDITORIAL - Just face the music

The best and quickest way to prove one’s innocence is to face one’s accusers and answer formal charges before an
official venue. Flight is always seen in this country as an indication of guilt. Apollo Quiboloy can bear this in mind as
he goes into hiding ostensibly because of threats to his life.

In fact the most immediate threat to Quiboloy is arrest for contempt of both the Senate and the House of
Representatives. The senate wants the leader of the religious group Kingdom of Jesus Christ and its media arm
Sonshine Media Network International to answer accusations by several KOJC members that they suffered sexual
abuse within the group, physical abuse by Quiboloy as well as labor exploitation in SMNI. House members,
meanwhile, are investigating SMNI for alleged violations of its franchise.

In February 2022, Quiboloy was placed on the most wanted list of the US Federal Bureau of Investigation following
his indictment before the US District Court in Santa Ana, California for “conspiracy to engage in sex trafficking by
force, fraud and coercion and sex trafficking of children; sex trafficking by force, fraud and coercion; conspiracy, and
bulk cash smuggling.” The FBI wanted poster said “it is alleged that females were recruited to work as personal
assistants, or ‘pastorals,’ for Quiboloy and that victims prepared his meals, cleaned his residences, gave him
massages and were required to have sex with Quiboloy in what the pastorals called ’night duty.’”

A US federal warrant for Quiboloy’s arrest was issued on Nov. 10, 2021. But there was no request for the extradition
of the pastor, a major supporter and spiritual adviser of then president Rodrigo Duterte. Quiboloy has been moving
freely around the country, and has often been seen in the company of Duterte.

The pastor who is wealthy enough to tool around in his own private jet is known to travel with a coterie of
bodyguards, and he is surely no stranger to death threats. So why has he suddenly decided to go into hiding? Because
of the timing, the inevitable suspicion is that he simply wants to avoid congressional grilling, and a possible arrest
and detention for contempt.

If he doesn’t want to face accusations against him in the Philippines, he should just be turned over to the US, where
he faces serious indictments that can put him away for life if guilt is established.

EDITORIAL – Probing the drug killings

Whether or not it’s true that probers of the International Criminal Court were in the country last December, the stories
should prod Philippine authorities to speed up and intensify their own investigation into possible extrajudicial killings
and other state abuses in the so-called war on drugs carried out in the previous administration.

The stories have swirled since late last year about the arrival in the country of ICC probers. Over the weekend, former
senator Antonio Trillanes IV said he had “inside information” that the stories were true, and the ICC probers had
gathered sufficient evidence to order the arrest of the primary respondents led by former president Rodrigo Duterte
and his first Philippine National Police chief, Sen. Ronald dela Rosa, reputed to be the architect of the bloody Oplan
Tokhang crackdown on illegal drugs.

The ICC had rejected the Philippines’ argument that the court lost jurisdiction after the country’s withdrawal from the
Rome Statute took effect. The ICC says even with the withdrawal, it has jurisdiction over possible crimes committed
when the Philippines was still a party to the Rome Statute, which created the court.

President Marcos, who said in July last year that “we’re done talking” with the ICC, said in November that the
country’s return to the ICC is “under study.” At around the same time, Department of Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin
Remulla, who previously said an ICC probe would be an “insult” to the country and an infringement on national
sovereignty, also said cooperation with the ICC “needs a serious study” on the part of the DOJ.

Solicitor General Menardo Guevarra had previously said the government could not stop private persons from
cooperating with ICC probers, who are looking into drug killings perpetrated not only during Duterte’s presidency
but also by so-called death squads when he was mayor or vice mayor of Davao City between Nov. 1, 2011 and June
30, 2016. When he was vice mayor, the mayor was his daughter, now Vice President Sara Duterte, who is reportedly
included in the ICC probe.
Trillanes claimed additional evidence would be gathered against the secondary respondents in the possible indictment
for murder as a crime against humanity. The country has a law covering such crimes. But Guevarra has said that
before indictments can be made, it must first be established that the killings were systematically carried out to
constitute a crime against humanity. The government, Guevarra said, was having difficulty finding witnesses and
gathering evidence that can sustain such an indictment.

Perhaps witnesses are more willing to cooperate with ICC probers. Even as the ICC proceeds with its work, the
government must continue showing the world that there is a sustained, earnest effort in the Philippines to uncover the
truth and give justice to victims of the drug war.