Truth Telling and other Perils in “Democratic” Philippines 213 The question of what reality and whose reality is presented through the media is linked to who own and control the media and in whose interest that control is exercised. The mass media, when controlled by competing interests, can present a multiplicity of views rather than a single, dominant perspective. That alone makes the issue of whether or not foreign media ownership should be allowed, indeed even encouraged, important. Allowing foreign ownership of the media is among the Constitutional amendments various Philippine governments, including that of Joseph Estrada and Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, have proposed. The proposals to open media ownership were outlined, for example, in a draft of the Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan 2004–2010. It has been argued that opening the media to foreign ownership would be divisive and ill-advised (Southeast Asia Press Alliance 2004). Ownership concentration Section 11 of Article XVI of the Philippine Constitution empowers Congress to “regulate or prohibit monopolies in commercial mass media when the public interest so requires.” But there is no clear limit on ownership in one media and across media (print and broadcast). Specic legislation is needed to regulate media ownership. In most countries, this is done through broadcasting legislation. Limiting cross ownership of the media could help ensure diversity of content, reecting the diversity of viewpoints and the diversity of society as a whole, and to prevent the manipulation of public opinion by powerful business or political interests. The Constitutional provisions on mass media ownership have largely been observed in practice. Foreigners do not own Philippine-based media organizations, although some local entrepreneurs have acquired the local franchise of foreign media groups. Some Filipino corporations, however, do own print publications such as magazines, while at the same time being involved with radio and TV broadcasting, as is the case with the giant Benpress Corporation of the Lopez family. National security offenses The Revised Penal Code of the Philippines contains provisions relating to national security offenses, among which the crime of incitement to rebellion or insurrection (Article 138) can have and has had an effect on the media, since it includes incitement to rebellion through “speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or other representations tending to the same end”. A number of journalists in 2006 were threatened with this charge, while the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism was accused of this offense, with charges actually being led in court. Article 154 penalizes any person who publishes “false news which may endanger the public order, or cause damage to the interest or credit of the State”,