MOVIES THAT SUCK: “The Canyons.” / “I Spit on Your Grave” (1978, Roku) and the 2010 remake.

“The Canyons” (2013, Sundance Now) erotic thriller-drama film directed by Paul Schrader and written by Bret Easton Ellis. Set in Los Angeles, the movie follows a wealthy young man who produces low-budget horror films. Mr Schrader is supposedly good as a writer (“Taxi Driver,” “Raging Bull”) and then as director (2017’s “First Reformed.” And you know Mr Ellis for his bestsellers “Less than Zero” (1985) and “American Psycho” (1991), both turned into movies, starring Robert Downey Jr. and Christian Bale, respectively. 

       But this movie, topbilled by a wasted Lindsay Lohan and a porn actor James Deen who couldn’t act, is a tedious exercise in cinematic futility. Some critics praised Ms Lohan’s acting. Really? 

       Plot: The discovery of an illicit love affair leads two young Los Angelenos on a violent, sexually charged tour through the dark side of human nature. Uh huh. 🎭👎🎬

“I Spit on Your Grave” (1978, Roku) and the 2010 remake. Jennifer is a fiction writer based in New York City who exacts revenge on her four tormentors who gang rape and leave her for dead.

       The original, written and directed by Meir Zarchi, is noted for its controversial depiction of extreme graphic violence, particularly the lengthy depictions of gang rape, that take up 30 minutes of its runtime. (Though the Roku showing was massively edited.) 

       The 2010 remake, directed by Steven R. Monroe and written by Stuart Morse, is no different. I don't know if this is more violent and revolting since I missed the bloodbath and violation in the original. 

       There are more “Spit” movies: 2013's “I Spit on Your Grave 2,” 2015's “I Spit on Your Grave III: Vengeance Is Mine,” and 2019's “I Spit on Your Grave: Deja Vu.” Go watch at your own risk. 🎥💻📽

“The Alto Knights.” / “The Irish Mob.”

“The Alto Knights” (2025, Max) biographical crime drama. Story: In a failed assassination attempt orchestrated by his ambitious underboss, Vito Genovese, Luciano family boss Frank Costello finds himself at a crossroads. Robert De Niro both portrays Mr Genevese and Mr Costello, which can be confusing a bit because both speak like De Niro and both talk like Mafia bosses. As is though, this is not a bad movie although nothing is really new here. But a tired retelling of what we already knew or watched in so many mob cinema tropes. 

       Plot: In a failed assassination attempt orchestrated by his ambitious underboss, Vito Genovese, Luciano family boss Frank Costello finds himself at a crossroads. Weary of the constant bloodshed and betrayals that define his life, Costello informs Genovese of his intention to retire and cede control of the Luciano family. However, Vito, a man consumed by ambition and paranoia, refuses to believe Costello's intentions, suspecting a ruse. The poisoned well of distrust between them spills over, igniting a silent, deadly war.

       Directed by A-1 director Barry Lee Levinson and written by A-1 writer Nicholas Pileggi, “Alto…” is a minor winner. But this is not Mr Levinson of “Good Morning, Vietnam” (1987), “Rain Man” (1988), “Good Morning, Vietnam” (1987), “Bugsy” (1991), and “Wag the Dog” (1997). And not close to Mr Pileggi’s “Goodfellas” (1990). Like the movie Barry and Nicholas are tired tropes of their past brilliance. Mr De Niro? He’s always De Niro, you know what I mean?  

       And yes, of course, this is a Mafia movie so we get a flood of “f” words. Obligatory. 🎥💻📽

“The Irish Mob” (2023, Amazon Prime) mob crime drama. This movie tells the story of crime boss Val Fagan and the dark world of gangland Dublin. He leads a violent, bloody and ruthless gang who are the main target of Garda detectives after an audacious cash depot robbery.

       Directed and written by Patrick McKnight, with Rob McCarthy playing Val, this little movie is basically a revisit of Irish mob fare. Dirty language, brutal violence, from-behind sex. Nothing much. 🎥💻📽

Compilation of short MORNING THOUGHTS.

Previously posted on my Facebook Page.

NEW YEAR THOUGHT, 2022. A humanity that is drawn inwards, “co-existing” in social media, confronts a more potent disease than the virus: Funk. Implosion of rageful inertia, confusion with waves of nonstop info. So we engage in rude jousts that take us down deeper in the dark. But we need to release the load, speak up, exhale. We can. Speak/respond in complete sentences. When you’ve made your point, disengage. Before the chat gets nasty, just write “Happy New Year!” 

A New Year Thought.

       A day's turnover to another year has always been celebrated as life reborn. Birthing. The last two years of Covid-19 pandemic shrouded us with a heavy blanket of misery. The physical loss can be filled with a renewed vibe of individual optimism; the economic shudder can be fixed with better leadership. But the divide that widened and the cracks that bled amongst us are harder to fix. 

       Yet on this day, we gather--we hug, we shake hands, we kiss-- we rejoice Life. Let's try to forgive and forget again. Love and unity in diversity are possible if only hearts are allowed to overcome hate, and people are pursued over politics. HAPPY NEW YEAR to y'all!

I am old. I have seen many New Year’s eves already. But I ride with the jolly welcoming. Enjoy! I will type up my little wishes for 2022 later but those are rather simple as we navigate the virus fear floods. Like, I’d like Dollar Tree as $1 as is, Elle Cyd The Koolcat to stay healthy, all my kids to remain calm and focused on cooking and selfies over politics and whininess, this cool house to retain its coolness, and spring/summer plants to be happier than the last. ☀💓☮️

They are rich and I am poor. Warren Buffett was $68 billion richer in 2000 and $105bn more this year; Mark Zuckerberg had $55bn last year, $118 more this year; Bill Gates, $98bn and $139bn; Jeff Bezos, $113bn and $198bn; and Elon Musk earned $25bn in 2000 and $266bn this year. Am I whining that they are super rich and I am super poor? Nope. I just enjoy “I am super poor.” LOL! 💰😂💰

Trump’s “Make America Great Again.” Biden’s “Build Back Better.” These pretty much pitch the same ideal. No different from FDR’s “New Deal” of the 1930s as America struggled with the Great Depression into the second phase of U.S. industrialization in the 1940s—which led to the Bretton Woods summit in 1944. Strengthen America. So while many diss China’s global trade expansionism as a threat to America, what really is so wrong about MAGA? 

     If Trump’s MAGA pursued Europe and America’s historical hawkish/military foreign policy as an expansionism tool, then I don’t concur with “Make America Great Again” or “Build Back Better.” Both are anchored on infrastructure upgrade, which was China’s focus via Deng Xiaoping’s “Four Modernizations” in 1977. Etc etcetera. Biden's BBB is cool but WTH we have a $770 billion Defense spending budget? 🗽🇺🇸🗽

The greatest, most effective distraction from reality is pop culture entertainment. Yet it is also our most effective escape from (harsh) reality and a natural way to equilibrium or mental/physical health balance. Yet in the advent of quicksilver computer technology, things evolved into an overkill. One-click, right on our palm, 24/7. So I repeat: Didn’t I tell you to focus on the road? Don’t look up! Look what’s in front of you! LOL! 😟📲😫

Anti-Christian memes flood social media. There are 2.382 billion mostly working class Christians in the world. Such a huge number and so they are insulted. The New Narrative says the Majority Working Class is Populism. And whether Populism is Right or Left, it is universally bad. You bite that pitch like a bone to a dog. And forgot that there is a term called Rich Elite, mostly Christians as well, who handed you this gadget to diss the devout. Divide and rule is profitable. 

     Yet religions as cultural facts don’t really differ. As huge collectives, they pursue universal good over universal bad. And humanity is far from perfection. Christian devotees and Christian haters aren’t immaculate or pure. And of course, it’d be idiotic to malign Islam for obvious reasons. ☃✝️☮️

Many "share" personal SOS to the world via social media like some sort of self-validating belongingness. I understand. But how many in here would get out of their way to stay with you till you survive the funk? But we have family and friends, in person. Three of them who have time to work things out with you right here and right now. These "alive" people negate the 4,001 in here who have ready "likes" and stickers and emojis and GIFs of wonderful approvals, 24/7. 😞😩🙃

CHRISTMAS DAY THOUGHT.  “Jesus Christ was a Subversive.” Title of the editorial that We Forum, the newspaper that I first worked with, used to print each Christmas Day. Dictatorship years. We Forum was an indie vanguard of progressive ideas then. JC was a relentless activist and village organizer. For years, I worked with Christian volunteers in calamity hit places. They contract diseases, many perish. Yet they stay. I never questioned Faith that aids the needy. The Spirit of Christmas. ☃✝️☮️

The times when Left/Right politics in cahoots with profit gods decide what is constitutional, correct, or factual. You’d probably say, it has always been that way. Trudat. These days though, the pitch is blatant 24/7. “Conventional wisdom,” “writings on the wall,” or popular perception depend on which side of the spectrum you are on/in. Media is integral if not the center of this frenzy. Yet the Media chooses to tell us stuff per their corporate sponsors via partisanship BS. 

     So it is due us, public/consumers, to triple-check what is tossed at us. Read, dig up, research, find out more. A number of Top 10 richest individuals on earth own or have huge stakes in major newspapers or media organizations. Jeff Bezos. Carlos Slim Hulu. Warren Buffett. Etc etcetera. Elon Musk may even buy some since by now he has readers out there in the Milky Way. ETs wanna know what latest shenanigans humans are up to. 👈👽👉

The impulse to Dance existed in early primates before they taught us how to boogie. Dance has been an important part of ceremony, rituals, celebrations and entertainment since before the birth of the earliest human civilizations. Archaeology delivers traces of dance from prehistoric times such as the 30,000-year-old Bhimbetka rock shelters paintings in India and dancing figures in tombs from c. 3300 BC. So live good, love good, eat only good food—and Dance! 💃👩‍❤️‍👨🕺

Facebook M.I.B.?

Written years ago.

THERE's been a number of posts that I read in the last few days saying their FB accounts have been “locked out” or demobilized, some posts deleted. If this is really happening, so be it. This is essentially a free media venue or an “open” public/universal forum. We should realize that someone is in-charge of “keeping the house” via standards that they are trying to instill, probably. It's their house. Meantime, I do recognize the good things that Facebook and social media offer. One huge advantage/benefit of FB (Twitter etc) is the presence of a flowing exchange of thoughts and publication of work and info-sharing that were not as easy and accessible before. 

       Old school media was a specialized profession--which means, a byline is earned by way of a news story that was gathered out there and was deliberated by a board of editors before publication. An eagle-eyed scrutiny of articles. Once a faulty report comes out, the newspaper runs the risk of a libel case and/or the ruin of a journalist's career. It'd be hard to find another writing job again if a report was proven to be fabricated, distorted or made up. 

       The major disadvantage of social media-fed news is—there is no way to edit or filter all these infos and “facts.” One survey says this, the other study debunks it. Videos are staged, visuals are photoshopped. Anyone can blog as a so-called sexologist, psychologist, or some “expert.” In fact, “legit” news on Yahoo are actually based on click frequency and “trending” behavior and not because it is news, per se. 

       One needs to figure things out if a news item is a sponsored advertisement, a political campaign fodder, an opinionated take on some issue, or actually the traditional/conventional 4 Ws and 1 H of journalism. Worse, the freewheeling and nonchalant way how people converse or argue in social media equals the way drunks and stoned individuals banter. There seems to be no way to put a break on these—especially on this season of election/s. An obvious derogatory meme or an apparent bogus data come out so fast and shared quickly globally that there's no way to control it. 📱💻📲

LET’s go back to our eWonderment. Are some FB accounts really been “locked out” or demobilized, and some posts deleted? Could be or maybe it's true. Yet I don't see it as “censorship.” I struggled with that at the height of my long journalism career back home. Yet I don't think this is censorship—it is a simple case of “Let's put some breaks a bit.” There's been a lot of obvious false and misleading/destructive infos pertaining to elections (here in the US and in the Philippines) and the people involved as candidates that I read in the past few months. And the way how people talk? Damn, it's like a damned nasty relationship fight or bar-room brawl. Cuss words, curses of all kinds. 

       Thing is, we always howl about the right to free speech. I get that loud and clear. But free speech doesn't say mouths and language running berserk. The words “rude” and “abusive” and “judgmental” that we so love to accuse or caution people about are splattered all over Facebook like that's actually how humans talk? 

       I don't want to overthink the “lock out” or demobilized accounts and deleted posts. Facebook is still a free venue to one and all. Yes, it isn't actually free because we pay for internet connects, but you know what I'm saying. I try my best to post what I deem as alright—within and around the boundary of rational chat and light fun—for my kids and schoolchildren, Christians and Pagans and Muslims, Republicans and Democrats and Communists, and Americans and Filipinos and Koreans and Kenyans to enjoy. When you think about it without overthinking, it's a no brainer. 📱💻📲

Religion and Stuff.

Response/s to Facebook discussion.

I AM not a religious person but I have always been in/around religious people. My family, my culture (Catholic). The American white family that I live with pray a Christian prayer before each meal. I worked with mostly religious people (Christians, Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, Shinto) as volunteer in calamity areas in Asia for many years in my past. 

       I am an Ananda Marga initiate, apprenticed for a Theravada Buddhist monk, my political ideology could be communism/socialism based on Confucianism as "religious" paradigm, dated a (Gardnerian) Wiccan for years, the lead singer in my rock band was Muslim who wore the burqa and prayed before shows, in high school I kind of preached The Bible (or “The Way,” a 1939 book on Catholic spirituality by Josemaría Escrivá de Balaguer, and so on and so forth. 

       In essence, my point: I don't see the sense in so many anti religion (mostly anti Christian) jokes, insult, heckles etc in social media in America, which is majority Christian. America, being the world's self-anointed model of anything good, peaceful, sweet, correct and cool. Humanity is never immaculate/pure and that imperfection is (also) brought up by religious diversity and cultural differences. But there are ways to unite people given these divergences and "unparallel" ways. 

       We pursue the good in human interfaces because it is fun to do so. I experience/d those in real life long before the internet or social media was born. In fact, many pagans and animists and atheists and indigenous tribes melded beliefs with traditional faiths like Christianity, Islam, Taoism etc. They coexist.    

       I try to laugh when a joke that objectifies, appropriates or shames religion Christianity is told. But I couldn't because that'd mean demeaning the other person although he/she isn't there. 

       But I laugh a lot over silly stuff. I laugh like I am old, grownup, and a "child" by heart. I was raised not to make fun of the man in a turban, the woman dressed in a robe and veil, and the dude reading a Bible or praying on a mat on sundown. But I laughed a lot when The Three Stooges and Dolphy (Filipino comic) came on TV then. Primal cool. Easy and effortless to do so. ✝️☯️☮️

Photo credit: Learn Religions.

Political Ramblings from Years Ago.

SOME post-2016 election posts (or notes). Copy-pasted from my Facebook Page. I didn't update or edit these entries from the original posts. My apologies. I (re)post my past words so I could also restudy my progression per how I view life and living from then to now. I cannot say how I formulated my insight years ago, or even last year, is totally the same as how I think right now. No. We evolve.   

DID presidential candidates “play” the voting public? I believe the word isn't “played.” Maybe as Jeff Beck (the guitarist, not the other Beck) said, politicians “lie.” They lied because they knew it'd be easier to lie than to sell facts—facts that will be against them. Elections are about winning—whatever it takes. And in American elections, always a very few percentage show up. Lowest was the 46 percent in the Clinton/Dole race in 1996. This last one was the second-lowest. So candidates are actually talking to a “few” captured audience—that is why catchphrases and sloganeering worked. Like rahrah in a ball game. Trump promised these, Sanders promised these—cakes from polar extremes. 

       Yet the story behind it all is—OIL. 

       Saudi Arabia is slowly but surely losing clout with America and West. SA-led OPEC countries have been threatening to cut oil output as Russia and non-OPEC members battle them for pricing. Two weeks ago, OPEC agreed to reduce its own production by 1.2 million barrels a day. This developed following Russia's previous announcement that it had already announced plans to cut output by 300,000 barrels a day next year, down from a 30-year high last month of 11.2 million barrels a day. Mexico also pledged to cut 100,000 barrels, Azerbaijan by 35,000 barrels and Oman by 40,000 barrels. The US' main oil imports come from Canada, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela. 

       Russia and SA are the world's top #2 crude oil producing countries; the US accounts for nearly 20 percent of the world's total oil consumption per day. 

       There is no such thing as making America great again. It is just a matter of handing over the baton to the next leader who can negotiate better with oil giants. All the Mexico talk is bull. Mexico is still the US' #3 trade partner and it's a next-door neighbor plus a huge population that is an economic force than illegal nuisances. Russia could be the #2 exporter of oil to the US which will make the Kochs happier since they could deregulate pricing et al by virtue of Russia's entry to WTO in 2012. And China despite Trump's anti-China rhetoric is still the China whose crap clogs US retail and has been lending money to all corners of the world, especially to giants like Brazil and Venezuela and yes, Russia. 

       Trade balance, military spending (while Pyongyang continues to bait Washington to keep on spending on military hardware), pharmaceutical 1 percent's machinations in Afghanistan and Myanmar/Indonesia (Asean) via George Soros etc. The Assange leaks were obvious—yet it could sway elections. But don't people know that it's all Russia while the dude lives in an Ecuadorian embassy? Ecuador and China have lotsa investment deals. Trump is dealing cards, not running a country based on new policies that should go beyond stone age protectionism. 

       What has been done so far—Carrier and the Mexico transfer and appointment of environmental czars who make folly of climate change. Is that making America great again? It's the same scribblings on the white board. But well, these win elections especially that candidates are talking to only half of the populace. ✍🙃😉

ONE very effective campaign game changer that worked for Trump was the WikiLeaks Hillary email fiasco. Julian Assange is a genius—a genius hacking xxxxxxx harlequin. Right on time, right on target. He knew that a huge throng of Democrats (mostly Sanders believers) will easily bite his candy—they did. I know of a number of Democrats who switched to either Trump or Johnson or decided not to vote at all after the email leaks came out on crunch time. 

       I believe that jacked up Trump votes easily. After the fact, I am more interested to observe how Washington deals with Kremlin/Russia than question or protest Trump's victory. He won, period. ✍🙃😉

WHEN it comes down to it, it is fine that followers of two political polar extremes stay glued to their belief—as long as the crack isn't so wide so that compromise and negotiation are still possible. I believe that it is much better than when people are seemingly bunched on just one side. That'd eventually allow dictatorship or autocracy—even if at the get go one-person governance commands majority allegiance.   

       Those who will oppose him/her become rebels whether we define them as Right or Left. Yet as in the nature of humankind, I don't believe all of us will agree as one—although universal good and evil seem to tread a parallel balance like black and white. We are not like that. We are either half-weirdo or a bit saintly. Many times the insane becomes cool and mutate into a rock star--and the sane turns out boring and never get a date. Humans are that unpredictable and contradictory. So Trump voters and Hillary believers, it's okay to argue—as long as somewhere somehow you'd all line-dance to the Bee Gees' “Night Fever” on syncopated cadence. ✍🙃😉

The “Hoohah” Monologues, state censorship, self-censorship, freedom of speech...

By Pasckie Pascua

FIRST PUBLISHED IN The Indie; Loved by the Buffalo Publications. 2007 (Asheville, North Carolina).

HOOHAH!!! Remember how Al Pacino’s Col. Frank Slade proudly spewed martial chic and gruff sophistication to the word (or was it a cuss) as he swooned and tangoed with fine wine and sweet women in “Scent of a Woman”? No wait, that was, “Whoa!” that he haughtily belted... I stand corrected.
Whatever it was, that movie was pretty cool stuff!
So what about “The Hoohah Monologues”? The first time I heard, “Hoohah!”—Mr Pacino crossed my mind, who else? A one-man gig for Michael Corleone, The Godfather, I thought out loud... No, I’m wrong again.
You must’ve already heard the story by now... A couple of months ago, a modified marquee in a theater in Atlantic Beach, Florida drew some attention. “Hoohah” replaced a word in a famous play after a female motorist complained about finding the previous wording offensive. Some thought “The Hoohah Monologues” was the name of a punk-rock or new wave band, or something – after all, said venue books acts of diverse musical genres. Meantime, I’m sure you’ve known of 80s acts with outrageous monickers, in the mold of Butthole Surfers and Piss Factory, right? Honestly though, I didn’t know what “hoohah” meant until my 9-year-old neighbor Colby The Dolby admitted that it actually meant “vagina,” or what he meekly muttered as, “that thing down there.”
“We got a complaint about this play The Vagina Monologues,” said Bryce Pfanenstiel, of the Atlantic Theater. “We decided we would just use child slang for it. That’s how we decided on Hoohah Monologues.” They did this after a driver who saw it complained to the theater, saying she was upset that her niece saw it.
The woman was reportedly enraged because she was forced to respond to her niece when asked what a vagina is. “I’m offended I had to answer the question!”
Uhh, I wonder... has anybody heard of an off-off Broadway play called, “The Penis Offensive”? It’s certainly not as famous and engaging as Eve Ensler’s Obie Award-winning episodic play, centered on various women’s views about the aforementioned part of their body... but, still, this “Penis” one-acter kind of courageously super-navigated “unexplored” terrains of the male genitalia like you’ve never imagined before. I tell you, it was obnoxiously nauseating!
Anyways... what the hell, right? The pristine beauty of living in the US of A—I dearly, deeply believe—is the fact that human beings are afforded the free will to say “Yes” or “No” to any given stimulus. Refuse or agree, conform or object. Or fence-sit, stay on the middle, it’s okay—that’s also a basic human right... But it’s all about Freedom.
But then, the word “vagina” flickering so proudly on a theater’s billboard, offensive? What about a giant full-color poster of half-naked Giselle Bundchen on super-tiny Victoria’s Secret underwear devouring a prominent spot at Times Square’s tourist belt? That’s a simplification, but—ah, contradictions...

I DON’T REALLY intend to consume my time on such elementary, hypocritical discourse. But I’d like to talk about this thing called “censorship.” It’s a popular notion that censorship is usually, most likely imposed by governmental institutions. That is a given, I guess... but the deeper anomaly rests within our psyche’s workings. We—wittingly and unwittingly—excise ruthless, often wayward, awkward “censorships” upon ourselves by way of acquired racial bias, over-adherence to “political correctness,” ideological/political dogma, and cultural/religious bigotry, that don’t necessarily emanate from State-imposed mores and “moral” statutes.
Censorship is the removal or withholding of information from the public by a controlling group or body. Typically, censorship is done by governments, religious groups, or the mass media, although other forms of censorship exist. The withholding of official secrets, commercial secrets, intellectual property, and privileged lawyer-client communication is not usually described as censorship when it remains within reasonable bounds. Because of this, the term “censorship” often carries with it a sense of untoward, inappropriate or repressive secrecy.
I mean, do we get it? Official/legal definitions tend to appear more complex than the act itself... We are so consumed with extravagant wordplay and lush vocabulary that human reflex (or common sense) gets lost in the dizzying fray.
Meantime, yes—it’s true that media censorship as imposed by governments remains as the one most incurable poison to freedom of speech. Or, it’s the most “popular” form of censorship. In China or Nepal, for instance, a wrong caption equals a warrant of arrest, and until now, an open tirade or passing ridicule against/of a public official is synonymous to jailtime or death wish.
In Turkmenistan, for example... State television displays a constant, golden profile of President Saparmurat Niyazov at the bottom of the screen. Newscasters begin each broadcast with a pledge that their tongues will shrivel if their reports ever slander the country, the flag, or the president.
According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, the ten most censored media in the world are those in North Korea, Turkmenistan, Burma, Equatorial Guinea, Libya, Eritrea, Cuba, Uzbekistan, Syria, and Belarus. This means that no one can broadcast or publish anything these governments consider to be “immoral” or “harmful,” or that threatens the countries’ “stability” (which usually means the government’s own power base). This is what we usually think of when we hear the word censorship.
Democratic countries, on the other hand, take pride in upholding the principle of freedom of speech. People are free to say and write whatever they wish, with some carefully defined exceptions.
In America, for example, we can always make fun of the President or any public official like it’s simply one insignificant practical joke, no big deal. But that’s not the real deal – the deal is, it’s FREEDOM. Sadly though, we oftentimes push that freedom to the limit because we have the best of it... and we savor it to the hilt. Sacha Baron Cohen AKA Borat makes it hip and cool, Sarah Silverman gets away with it because she’s “acting” vs a super-smashed Mel Gibson off-cam, but Chris Rock is the Master of them all—he makes fun of anything “white” and earns hefty paycheck for it. Who cares! It’s entertaining...
In the Philippines, it’s “different”—at least, when I was a student (during the Marcos years). One time, a student activist berated presidential daughter, Imee, when she spoke before a University of the Philippines crowd. After the event, Imee’s bodyguards simply grabbed the youngster and threw him out of the 9th-floor window of the building. But, of course, that’s just one of so many bizarre stories emanating from the dictatorship’s genocidal years...

IN A MARKET economy, there is another controlling power at work – the power of money. In North America, most mainstream publications depend on two income sources: subscriptions and advertisers. Both influence decisions about content. Readers must find the content relevant, interesting, tasteful, and entertaining, or they will drop their subscriptions. And advertisers will cancel their accounts if they consider the content to undermine or challenge their messages about the products they sell.
Consider the tobacco industry’s enormous advertising power in the US and Canada. According to the American Federal Trade Commission, annual advertising and promotions expenditures for the US tobacco industry in 2000 were over $9.5 billion. The advertising expenditures for Canadian tobacco companies in 2000, on the other hand, were over $19 million. Yet we all know that the tobacco industry’s economic clout goes beyond tobacco products.
Before it was bought out by British America Tobacco in February 2000, Canada’s largest tobacco company, Imperial Tobacco, was owned by Imasco Ltd – the same company that owned Shoppers Drug Mart and Canada Trust. RJR Macdonald, Canada’s second largest tobacco company, is owned and controlled by American-based R. J. Reynolds Tobacco, which also owns Nabisco foods.
Meantime, forty percent of Canada’s third-largest tobacco company, Rothmans, Benson and Hedges Inc., is owned by Philip Morris Tobacco – the largest tobacco company in North America. Philip Morris also owns Kraft Foods, the largest packaged food company in North America. This combination of tobacco and food products includes 91 brands with annual revenues of $100 million each, and 15 brands that generate annual revenues of over $1 billion each.
With these givens staring down like an imposing dark cloud of control, some media institutions easily succumb to “self-censorship.” The logic is simple—without advertising, there is no publication. No publication, no job.
According to a study by the American Council on Science and Health, popular women’s magazines state that they have a commitment to general health coverage, yet they fail to cover the number one cause of cancer death in women—lung cancer. Women’s magazines continue to publish cigarette ads, but rarely include information on the negative health effects of smoking. Of the 2,414 health-related articles published last year, only 24 articles – less than 1 per cent – addressed the health effects of tobacco. Moreover, the image of female smokers as independent, attractive and lean (or sexy) was portrayed overwhelmingly in the advertisements.
In November 1983, Newsweek ran a 16-page special health supplement written by the American Medical Association. Although the original AMA manuscript included information on tobacco addiction, Newsweek resisted any mention of cigarettes. That issue of Newsweek had 12 full-page cigarette ads. This hasn’t really changed... Most networks seem to propagate health consciousness via talk shows and special features, yet commercials continually run ads by food products that only contribute to the growing rate of obesity, heart failures, respiratory problems, among others, in the country.
“Self-censorship” is also prevalent in writers and artists. Blogs, books, films etc are “censored” or “classified” by the authors out of deference to the sensibilities of others without an authority directly pressuring one to do so. Self-censorship is often practiced by film producers, film directors, publishers, news anchors, musicians, or authors.
Again, I digress...

OVER-ADHERENCE to political-correctness is another example of self-censorship that isn’t just confined to media circles, but to educational institutions, as well. Political correctness makes people stupid, said Elizabeth Kantor of The Boston Globe.
After interviewing 14,000 undergraduates at 50 colleges across the country, researchers from the University of Connecticut have determined that “seniors actually know less about American history and government than entering freshmen.” That’s because they spend four years with professors who no longer teach them English literature, the classics, or any of the other pillars of Western civilization, Kantor claimed. If modern college students study “dead white men” such as Homer, Lincoln, and Shakespeare at all, it’s to expose and condemn their patriarchal oppression, racism, and imperialism, she added.
A new book by University of Pennsylvania professor emerita Phyllis Rackin, for example, attacks “Macbeth” for promoting “the domestication of women.” Not a word about the beauty of Shakespeare’s language, or his “peerless insights into human nature.” Ms Kantor adds that colleges now prefer to give courses in comic books, “queer theory,” pornography, or Erica Jong. These days, we tend to easily reject a reading material, film craft, or musical effort—if they do not conform with our political beliefs or sexual orientation. Forget about good writing... Or, well, “good writing,” I guess, has to be politically-correct. Then, again we have to define what “political-correctness” is.
One other very significant and powerful “self-censorship” is done in historical circles. Until now, the world recognizes a hero that “colonizers” imposed in a “colonized” culture’s mindset. University scholars and history researchers in respected educational institutions recognize, for instance, Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo as THE hero in the Philippine-American War. Volumes of documents obtained by the University of the Philippines’ cultural anthropology department contend otherwise.
Aguinaldo, who ordered the execution of revolutionary leader Andres Bonifacio, “represented” the Filipino people in selling (or “ceding”) the islands to the US for a mere $20 million under a Treaty of Peace between the United States and Spain on December 10, 1898. Bonifacio and his brother Procopio were slain by Aguinaldo’s men because they objected to the treaty that were forged following the defeat of Spain by the US in the “mock” Battle of Manila Bay.
I don’t think that “censorship” of historical records will ever be corrected, at all, though. Day after day, the so-called media cover political and cultural upheavals all over the world—and fed to the unsuspecting public like tobacco or paracetamol. Over and over again... After all the hundreds of TV hours that major networks spent on Anna Nicole Smith, we may never know the “truth” behind her untimely death. What we get are the sweetened fillings and deodorized morsels that litter the periphery of her glamourized ruin. Or how one souvenir photograph by Joe Rosenthal—iconized as the Flag Raising at Iwo Jima—could alter or blur valuable pages in World War II history.
Most of the time, it only takes common sense to find out why “censorship” of the truth continues to exist unabated. In my novel, “Waiting for Winter,” I touched several significant events that took place in the Philippines from 1980 to 1992 that I wasn’t able to fully explore because of “state censorship” and my own, admitted “withholding of facts” because these could put the so-called revolutionaries in a bad light. Still, I was called a “revolutionary journalist” by my peers back home.

AH, DAMN, I talk too much, don’t I? I was just going to rant about “Hoohah” when all these just came out of my head. As if you don’t already know about all these that I just babbled about...
Oh well, this is the pleasure of self-publishing, I guess. I can always write and write and write—as long as it’s within the legal boundaries of whatever I am wading on. I don’t even know... I may get a letter from Immigration one of these days for being too “political, radical”? Or my purportedly quiet benefactors may cut their contributions to this madness—because I just printed a “politically-incorrect” story? I don’t know. Freedom in America is still very beautiful and glorious to me—such a gift. This, coming from a survivor of a regime that shoots down, literally, a hardheaded fool who dare question an “official” pronouncement from the hallowed halls of power.
I really don’t know. Tell me if I am pushing my acquired freedom too far. All I know is I am writing, and it’s cool. I am safe... Am I? You see, my subject isn’t even about a vagina.