PCO’s Media Restrictions Spark Outrage as Marcos Trust Rating Drops

As President Ferdinand "Bongbong" Marcos Jr.’s approval rating continues to decline, the Presidential Communications Office (PCO) has come under fire for prioritizing media restrictions over addressing urgent national issues. Critics argue that the PCO’s focus on limiting media access, particularly for journalists covering Malacañang, is a diversion from more pressing matters facing the country.

One of the most vocal critics of the PCO's new policy is Joyce Panares, Managing Editor of Manila Standard and former President of the Malacañang Press Corps. In an interview with Bilyonaryo News Channel, Panares questioned the qualifications of those responsible for drafting the new accreditation guidelines, as well as their intentions behind the changes.

“What do they mean by ‘seasoned’? How do they define that? I’m just wondering—are the people who crafted these rules even that seasoned themselves? Have they spent five years on the government beat? Because this is starting to feel discriminatory,” Panares said, voicing concerns that the new guidelines were a thinly veiled attempt to target specific journalists.

The new rules have sparked outrage not just for their vague definitions but also for their potential to exclude journalists with deep experience and established credentials from covering government events. Panares and other critics contend that the guidelines were hastily crafted and could easily be used as a tool to silence critical voices, especially those from long-standing members of the press.

Marichu Villanueva, Associate Editor of The Philippine Star, also weighed in on the issue. In an interview with Pinky Webb on Agenda (Bilyonaryo News Channel), Villanueva likened the PCO’s approach to media accreditation to a "shotgun approach," rather than a precise, targeted solution to the actual problems at hand.

“Their solution is very reactionary. It should be laser-focused, not a shotgun approach to accreditation problems,” said Villanueva, emphasizing the importance of addressing the root causes of accreditation issues instead of creating sweeping regulations that impact everyone.

Villanueva also pointed out that if there are concerns about media accreditation, the PCO should first examine its own procedures. Specifically, she argued that the process had become too lenient over the years, leading to the issuance of press credentials to non-legitimate individuals. Scrutinizing the system would be a more effective solution than overhauling the entire accreditation process with overly broad measures.

Another controversial element of the new accreditation guidelines is the provision that allows the PCO to revoke a journalist's accreditation based on "false reporting." Villanueva expressed concern that this provision could easily be misused, with the government labeling reports as false simply because they do not align with its narrative.

“It’s too easy for the government to use ‘false reporting’ as an excuse—even when the reports are true.

The problem is, when they don’t like the truth, they refuse to acknowledge it,” Villanueva warned, highlighting the dangerous precedent this sets for press freedom.

Additionally, there have been allegations of a double standard in the issuance of journalist visas. Local reporters face tighter restrictions, while some foreign journalists have reportedly been granted visas despite not being part of the President’s official entourage. This apparent preferential treatment for foreign media—allegedly based on connections with PCO officials—has added fuel to the controversy surrounding the new guidelines.

Meanwhile, the PCO continues to focus on finalizing its proposed budget for the upcoming year, which includes the purchase of new equipment and vehicles. Critics argue that this focus on media restrictions, rather than meaningful reforms or the needs of the public, is indicative of the government’s misplaced priorities.