Editorial

Telling the Pangasinan story

TIMES have tremendously changed since The Sunday PUNCH first went to press in July 1956. At that time, barangays, municipalities, cities, and provinces were distinctly defined not just by geographic boundaries but by the limited communication and transport facilities that allowed people to connect with each other across borders.

But even in our now ‘globalised’ world where the planet has been made smaller by the power of the internet, community journalism has not lost its relevance as people continue to value news that directly impact on their lives and their immediate community.

The internet has, in fact, strengthened community journalism by expanding its reach to those who may be far from their hometown but continue to be deeply attached to their family and history.

For us here at The Sunday PUNCH, we have strived to keep up and take advantage of the transformations in media and technology — going online through our website with a forum for our community members to have their voice heard and joining the social networking community — to deliver the kind of journalism that our founder, Ermin Garcia Sr., stood for: telling the story of Pangasinan through a courageous commitment to the truth.

As we celebrate our 55th year amidst the ever-changing media landscape with its numerous challenges, we find constant inspiration in the continued patronage of our loyal readers and advertisers and hope in the interest and concern of the new generation of Pangasinenses.

*      *      *      *      *     *

What’s the point?

WE disagree with Leila de Lima’s move to reinvestigate the Vizconde Massacre.  We also disapprove P-Noy’s order for a reinvestigation.

What’s all the point?

The press conference held by De Lima and the NBI on June 28 to reveal the investigation’s “results” was also detestable.

With the Supreme Court decision on Dec. 14, 2010 acquitting Hubert Webb and six others accused of killing Mrs. Estrellita Vizconde and her daughters, Carmela and Jennifer on June 30, 1991, the case was closed with finality.  Even with De Lima unleashing four new “invisible witnesses” who had allegedly witnessed the crime, the Constitution disallows a retrial of the case under its double jeopardy provision. Thus, when you are tossing in a dud for a bomb, when you are firing blanks, it smacks of tomfoolery.

So, again, really, what’s the point?

Back to Homepage