Roni Cabrito

In the following articles, we look into recent developments with Shopee, a Singaporean-based e-commerce platform with gamified features as one of its unique selling propositions. Similar to TikTok, Shopee earns mostly through ad revenue and commission fees. Founded in 2015, the online marketplace has dominated Southeast Asia as the largest e-commerce platform with over 343 million visitors per month, followed by Tokopedia and Lazada (Geldman, 2021). According to the first article (Mulia, 2021), the company is planning to expand its operations to the European and Latin American markets, with a successful launch in Brazil and being the top shopping app in Poland and Spain among Android users as of October 19, 2021.

That being said, despite facing amazing revenue and market share growth figures, Shopee’s aggressive marketing strategies, including attractive coupons, flash deals, and free shipping options as well as costly marketing campaigns such as ‘11.11’ and ‘12.12’ retail sales, have taken a huge chunk out of their profits. As noted in Shah’s article, Sea Ltd., Shopee’s parent company, has faced continuous net losses since 2017 despite growth in market cap. Scalability issues may arise as their tight liquidity may be disincentivizing for stricter investors. As Shopee plans to raise about $6.2 billion in new shares and note offerings to help fund its global expansion, their financial health may pose a problem.

As of 2021, the e-commerce market in the Southeast Asian (SEA) region can be classified as an oligopolistic competition wherein few firms with high market shares compete, with Shopee and Lazada being the most dominant in the region (Raj, 2021). Like their competitors, Shopee employs second-degree price discrimination by offering collectable coins and coupons for consumers willing to buy in bulk while also attracting repeat purchases. Shopee’s aggressive marketing strategies and undercutting tactics can also be considered as a predatory pricing strategy to retain high market share. They also recently offered more app features such as ‘shopperteinmant’ (i.e., Shopee Live, an in-app live streaming feature to increase foot traffic) to differentiate their app. On the other hand, the company’s pricing tactics may not be sustainable given their plans for expansion. As Itaú BBA, a Brazilian corporate investment bank, analysts note in a report (Shah, 2021): “...the funding from its parent company is limited; the amazing growth figures, also driven by very appealing commercial conditions, might start to decelerate in the coming months.”

On the whole, it is crucial for Sea’s Shopee to maintain their leading brand position and block out rising local SEA e-commerce players to attract investors with their high growth figures. They can either 1) retain their attractive low-cost positioning and bank on investors willing to wager on their illiquidity, or 2) take a more conservative approach and cut back on their price tactics to alleviate the cash burn eating at their profits, albeit sacrificing a bit of their market share. The choice seems clear as Shopee recently increased their commission rate in Brazil, from 5% in 2020 to 12% this year.

Articles on Shopee:
Shopee enters France, Spain, and Poland in aggressive European expansion
By Khamila Mulia

Singapore’s Shopee eyes global expansion with a gamified approach to e-commerce
By Saqib Shah

I stuff my ticket in my pocket and
let the strong tide of the rush hour carry
me along. There’s a struggle for balance —
knuckle-white grips on handles like lifelines
on a sea of suits and school uniforms.
The engine rumbles an artless croon; the
operator brusquely guides us through our
tour. There’s an elbow on my rib and a
suffocating heat, but I hold my breath
for the grand exhibition’s unveiling —
artifacts of life in bygone buildings;
microcosms within streets and alleys;
a sky nostalgic of a Classical
painting. I place my hand on the clear glass,
watching dear EDSA flit past my fingers.

280 steps. It takes about 280 steps to get from Room 221, the room I share with three other students, to the entrance of my dormitory building. I’m sure about this number because I have a pedometer on my phone.
I know the path like the back of my hand, walking along it for two months carrying my backpack and water jug—past the manager’s office, into the lobby, through the cafeteria and the never-ending hallway, up two flights of stairs, two right turns, and then straight to my bed. Walking is the fastest way to get to class, especially when you wake up late and don’t have the luxury of time to ride the Ikot Jeep; in UP, 280 steps is nothing.

Right now, however, as I sit on my bed with my phone on my ear, those 280 steps feel like a 5K walkathon. “So are you coming?” Chloe, my best friend in college, asks. I gulp, then glance at the time on the upper corner of my phone screen. It’s 10 – the dorm curfew.

“How are we getting there?” I ask skeptically. She answers in one breath, even the questions I have yet to ask.

“Jake’s got a car. We might go to Antipolo or wherever’s open. You can sleep over at my condo. Gio’s with us, too.”

Something in my chest stirs as I hear the name of the boy I have a crush on. I stand from my bed and empty out the contents of my backpack on top of it, feeling a sudden thrill run down my bones. Briefly, I’m reminded of all those coming-of-age movies I would watch in naive wonderment.

“C’mon, we’re already near Univ Ave. Are you coming or not?” she urges, and I think it through. How do I get past the lady guard? I’ve never gone out past curfew. I sleep at 11:30 on the dot. Mom will find out. Gio’s coming. It’s now or never.

“I’m going,” I answer before I can take it back.

I made up a story. We’ll fake an urgent family emergency, and Chloe’ll pretend to be my relative picking me up. It’s a simple plan, which means it’s easy to stick to, but there are about a million ways it could go wrong. At least I could bank on the fact that I was in the lady guard’s good graces. “What if she asks why we have different surnames?” I mention, and Chloe says we’ll be cousins.

“But if you were my sister, wouldn’t she ask less questions?” I point out, and she agrees. We run through the plan once as I change out of my sleeping clothes, and twice as I stuff my backpack. She hangs up. I tell my roommate who’ was engrossed in a movie on her laptop some vague excuse and walk out of the door, facing a pitch-black sky. One step.

My dormitory always reminded me of a fortress, not just because of the architectural design (the guard and manager’s office are stationed at the entrance, and our rooms face inwards towards an open, rectangular garden, making surveillance easy) but because of the rules. There were many, and they went by different names. Violations, protocols, permits – you name it. We had hallway monitors, forms for everything, shifts on cleaning bathrooms, and schedules when to eat. I appreciated the sense of order, and the stringency seemed a reasonable price to pay for safety, especially as an all-female dormitory. I had nothing to complain about (except perhaps the serving size of the meals) for the past year and a half of my stay.

Today is different. Today I scorn the security. Today it is a prison, and I’m a prisoner attempting to break out. 1, 2, 3, 4 – I count my steps to distract myself from my hammering chest. 280 steps means four minutes of stomaching the idea of deceiving a security guard, of reconsidering my life choices.

47 steps. My belly churns. I reach the first floor landing and trudge down the long hallway, crossing paths with the cats littered about. I think about myself as a teenager, about how I stick my head in fiction novels detailing this exact moment, about how I spent 18 years living vicariously through someone else’s experiences.
I lose count of my steps around the 200 mark. A tabby cat lying on a bench greets me at the end of the hallway. I think about the fortress rules, about the permit I should have filled up a day ago. Then I think about Gio and how our conversations make my heart flutter.
The lobby, which served a double purpose as a study area, held a couple of dormers strewn about on tables and cubicles, the sound of clacking keyboards and scraping chairs filling the air.

My eyes gravitate towards the desk where the lady guard was seated. 250, 260 – closer, closer. Placing my backpack on one of the chairs, I waste some time standing in the middle of the lobby rehearsing my script to perfection before I force my feet to walk towards her station. 280 steps. She notices me. Our eyes meet. My mouth goes dry. I wear a solemn face as I tell her the fabricated story I made. Family emergency. Sister. Pick me up.

There’s a pause. Her gaze pierces through me, and I feel like fainting. Knots tangle in my stomach as I endure the agonizing seconds. I brace myself for a fight, a call to my parents, a stern reprimanding of the rules. I do not brace myself for a nod, and an, “Okay, when are they coming?” The question throws me off-guard, the hundred rebuttals at my arsenal laid to waste. The stars seem to favor me as I tell her they’re already near. Then I slump down on the couch in a state of disbelief. That’s it? I think incredulously and bite my lip to stifle my grin. I didn’t even crack a sweat. Chloe’s text comes in not too long after. I spot the familiar green SUV by the driveway, and make out her familiar figure walking towards the entrance.

“Sorry for the late hour, Ma’am. I’m here to pick her up,” Chloe says by the door, feigning an urgent tone. “There’s an emergency with the family and I need my cousin to come with us.” My heart drops to my stomach as I realize what she just said. I anticipate the lady guard’s eyebrow raising before she does it.

“I thought she was your sister.”

I tense up. My eyes meet with Chloe’s, reading the dread within them. My words stumble over each other as I explain the slip-up, and Chloe quickly piles on. The air turns cold and my fight-or-flight response kicks in as I force myself to stay in character. The lady guard is now unsmiling, unimpressed as she eyes us both, and for a split-second I picture how my parents would react to getting a call about a non-existent family emergency. Would they lie for me? I wondered, like I didn’t already know the answer.

I’m dead, I think, just as the lady guard turns and says, “I’ll need you to fill out a form.” My knees weaken. It takes every inch of my willpower to conceal my relief. The rest of our conversation becomes a haze of curfew reminders and a string of apologies, and all throughout I just pray my parents are fast asleep in case the guard decides to give them a call.

I walk past the double doors with half a mind to not go sprinting and yelling like I just won gold at the Olympics. The last step to freedom. The chilly October air greets me. Chloe murmurs profanities at me as we approach our getaway car, but nothing can wipe the wide grin off my face.

Later that night, I would hold Gio’s hand on the ride home. His hand felt warm against mine. We would buy a rainbow-colored cocktail, and I would puke it out in a plastic bag because my friend was a terrible driver even when sober. I would change Chloe’s caller ID name on my phone to, “Cousin,” and we would laugh about it like an old memory.

In a week I would proceed to flunk an exam, and in a few months, I would pass up on spontaneous plans and opt for a deception-free evening in my dorm’s study area. But that’s for the future me to look back on. Because at that moment, as I got in my classmate’s car and we drove away like shadows in the night, the world was my oyster and I was its master. I made 280 steps.

Here's the thing: women do not stand on equal footing as men. That is an incontrovertible fact one would be quite ignorant to deny, but as much as I enjoy seeing women be empowered and oppressive social systems be deconstructed, there are certain "feminist" thinking I've seen circulating the social sphere that I believe is potentially harmful.

It is the fact that feminine women are underestimated, that the notion of feminism is portrayed largely as women being dominant, badass, and you could say, in a sense, about women being "masculine."

To clarify, I am not discarding the fact that women are tied down to stereotypical, heteronormative gender roles, because they absolutely are, and the heart of feminism is to advocate for women to break out of this restrictive box and glass ceiling that prevents them from aiming for anything other than what their sex dictates them to be.

For discussion's sake, I define femininity as the traits traditionally associated with women, such as sensitivity, nurturance, generosity, and the like. But gender is only a social construct, and so gender roles don't hold much water empirically; we shouldn't be paining a person to this dichotomous perspective. Obviously, women can be masculine, and men can be feminine.

Unfortunately, there seems to be a culture of feminism being a form of competition. The issues lies in the fact that feminine women get looked down upon, sometimes by fellow women. Pitting women against each other and creating this hierarchy of feminism is a toxic and selective mindset that only perpetuates sexism and misogyny. Feminism is about letting women be who they want to be, without prejudice nor harassment.

Women being feminine does not perpetuate sexist ideals—rather, the thought that there is something inherently wrong with being feminine is the problem, NOT femininity in itself. Society has brainwashed people to believe that "feminine" traits are inferior to "masculine" traits, but that is false. Only when society sees these two traits on equal footing do I believe we can achieve true equality.

By the time you read this, more than 5,000 cases will have already been added to the total count of positive COVID-19 cases in the Philippines¹.

This pandemic is far from over—the coronavirus refuses to be left behind in 2020. In January 2021, we detected the first case of a COVID variant in the country. By the time I write this (which is March 24), there’s already a new surge with our infection count nearly quadrupling the number of that on March 1.

At current, the numbers we face along with the heavy strain this puts on businesses and industries are extremely worrying. The increasing dichotomy between saving lives and saving the economy is also a hot topic between economists, medical experts and policy-makers alike.

So aside from cancelling your travel plans and practicing social distancing, is there anything else you can do to ensure the two most crucial things: 1) that we don’t get infected, and 2) that we expedite the process of going back to normal?

Hint: The answer is yes.

And it’s called a vaccine.

Before we delve deeper, it is appropriate that I disclaim that I am no medical expert nor am I going to advise you on which vaccine is the most effective, because as it stands, these are all very new developments and the efficacy of the vaccines run on a case-to-case basis. What I will do, however, is relay information on the status of vaccines in the country from my own research and give my personal opinion on the feasibility of the government’s plan to have 70 million Filipino adults (or 65% of the population) vaccinated by the end of 2021.

With that said, let’s break down the status of vaccines in the Philippines. The Philippine Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the usage of four vaccines, namely: Pfizer-BioNTech (USA and Germany), AstraZeneca (United Kingdom), Sinovac (China), and Sputnik V (Russia).

On February 28, we received the 600,000 Sinovac doses donated by China. The vaccines have been rolled out in March and vaccinations have commenced. On March 4, we received 525,600 of Oxford-AstraZeneca donated by COVAX. At the moment, we have secured delivery of 1.125 million doses of Sinovac and AstraZeneca vaccines, and have recently entered into an agreement with Moderna who will provide us with 20 million vaccine doses sometime around late May to early June. We are also expecting the arrival of 117,00 Pfizer vaccines around April. In sum, we are expecting 21.242 million doses by the first half of the year.

Rest assured, these vaccines undergo a multi-stage process of tests for safety and effectiveness before they’re approved for public use. It is important to note—though it is more the exception rather than the rule—that no vaccine is 100% effective, and there are cases wherein you may not be protected by the vaccine.

So if it has a tendency to be impotent, why are we still investing in them? The answer is herd immunity, or the point wherein 50% to 90% of our population becomes immune to the vaccine. This is vital in curbing the spread of the virus and providing indirect protection to those who are not immune to the virus.

What’s worrying is that recent polls show that many Filipinos are opposed to getting vaccinated. The first cause of worry to most Filipinos is its safety². This may partly be due to the use of Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) on vaccines. In simpler terms, the EUA shortcuts the approval process on vaccines that are under the development phase to hasten their availability in times of crises. Still, although the process was shortened, the FDA ran a risk-based evaluation to ensure that rolling out the vaccines would be more beneficial than detrimental.

The second issue is the surrounding efficacy of the Sinovac. Of course, this comes with certain politicking regarding China and the Philippines, but it is quite alarming that some citizens refuse to be vaccinated with the Sinovac, whose effectiveness the FDA has already ensured.

The trickiest issue raised is the question of why the private sector is not allowed to purchase the vaccines directly from the pharmaceutical companies themselves. Through the amended Republic Act (RA) 11525 or the Covid-19 Vaccination Law, private companies actually can purchase vaccines, so long as they enter into a tripartite agreement along with the government and manufacturer.

So the question is, why is there a need for the government to butt in?

This is because the suppliers require indemnity. Going back to the issuance of EUA, because these vaccines have not undergone full trial, the suppliers need reassurance that they won’t be held liable for any problems with their product post-purchase. The government has prepared a countermeasure for that through the aforementioned law, which creates a PHP 500-million indemnity fund to compensate any individuals who suffer adverse effects from the vaccine.

On the other hand, some businesses have mentioned that certain conditions on the tripartite agreement state that 50 percent of the doses that businesses purchase would be donated to the government. Although this is still being investigated, this is highly disincentivizing for businesses to purchase vaccines.

On the whole, certain government policies as well as the issuance of EUA understandably may be a cause for worry, but empirical evidence from other countries has shown that getting vaccinated is far better than battling a virus with no protection.

As the Department of Health (DoH) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have stated: “Millions of people around the world have received this vaccine, and evidence continues to show that the benefit of vaccination outweighs the risk of severe disease and death caused by Covid-19.”

With the limited supply of vaccines in the world, it is crucial that we make use of every last drop, or else we would have wasted millions in money and effort, and only lessened the potential of stifling the wave further. Vaccine illiteracy and political divisiveness only worsen the spread of the virus, and by extension, the living conditions of many Filipinos.

To successfully pull off the government’s immunization campaign, there is a need for cooperation and public trust from all stakeholders of the country. Of course, to do this, the government must step up—there must be transparency and corrective action between them and the healthcare system, private sector, LGUs, and the citizens to rebuild confidence in the vaccines. Anything less and we can say goodbye to going out for the rest of the year.

Under these trying times, one thing’s for sure: this pandemic is far from over, and the dream of going back to normal only grows farther if we don’t get vaccinated.

¹Based on the 7-day average (5,635) of COVID-19 cases from March 15 to 20, 2021
²Based on Octa survey conducted on January to February 2021; n = 1,200

This article is part of the CDC Advocacy campaign for Vaccine Literacy.

For the past three decades, the Philippines has grown steadily in the Human Development Index (HDI). Landing an HDI score of 0.718 in 2019, the country has managed to jump up 3 ranks from 2014 and is ahead of other developing countries, who altogether make up an average of 0.689. That being said, the country still trails behind the pack, particularly in the East Asia and the Pacific (EA&P) region which holds an average of 0.747, as well as in its own development group. Under the high human development category, the PH falls below an even higher average of 0.753, albeit it is notable that the score differential is within two-digits.

On a lighter note, the average annual growth rate of the Philippines from 2010-2019 is 0.76, much higher than the world’s average growth at 0.59 within the same timespan. With the trajectory that the nation’s HDI is at, we can expect the country to soon overtake the world growth by the next decade or two, holding other things constant. Being a strong contender in the EA&P region is still a long reach, but we can see that the trend for the Southeast nation is to keep growing at a slow but steady pace.

Facing the numbers, we can’t deny that the Philippines is developing, but with the pace that it’s at, it’s hard to decipher if the country’s truly progressing.

With this in mind, we take a deep dive into the dimensions of human development for the Philippines while benchmarking Vietnam¹ to assess the development of the former. In terms of all three dimensions, the Philippines dominates over Viet Nam except for life expectancy (see Figure 1.A), which may be due to lifestyle habits. Despite having a slightly higher population, the Gross National Income (GNI) per capita of the Philippines is also much higher than Vietnam’s by 24% (Figure 1.B). However, we see that in Figure 2 Viet Nam has flourished beginning 1990 and has since caught up closely with the Philippines, possibly overtaking the latter in the near decade.

Still, the Philippines however has paled in comparison for the past recent decades (1990-2019) with a lower growth rate of 0.66, overthrowing Vietnam whose trendline flattened by a smaller percentage.

Overall, comparisons with Vietnam shows that the performance of the Philippines in the recent decade is good, but holding other things constant, it is forecasted to continue improving at a steady upward growth side-by-side with Vietnam.

Notes:
Vietnam is part of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) along with the Philippines, and has the closest population to the latter. In 2019, Vietnam had 96.5 million people while the Philippines had 108.1 million.

By Josh Cabal & Roni Cabrito

Salot sa lipunan. Ugat ng kahalayan. Ligaw na kabataan. Kahihiyan sa angkan. These are just some Tagalog derogatory terms used to refer to people whose identities, behaviors, and interests differ from what's considered normal for their biological sex. We are talking about the LGBT people.

In spite of the fact that sex and gender are often used interchangeably, they’re not the same thing. Sex refers to a person's biological characteristics while gender is how you see yourself. If your biological sex does not align with the way you see yourself as, you are classified as transgender. Regardless, these people are human beings born free and bestowed with equality and dignity. Be that as it may, their human rights are still denied. There’s not a hint of doubt that numerous LGBT people are still detested and discriminated against.

In present time, the Philippines has gained recognition for being one of the most "gay-friendly" country in the whole world. But what classifies an LGBT friendly country? If the places, policies, individuals and institutions are cordial to members of the LGBT community and create an environment that is supportive of gay people and their relationships.

In the 1990s, gay activism had been evident in the nation, such as the Metro Manila Pride back in 1994. Up-to-date, they continue to gain support and raise community awareness, which lead to the present Manila Pride 2016, where they had an astounding 5000 active supporters.

Another imperative point is that if we compare the Philippines to other countries, our nation state is more subdued and conceding with their treatment of the LGBT community. Bearing in mind that in a number of countries, LGBT youth and supporters are beaten, tortured, abused, kidnapped, face life-long imprisonment, blinded or stoned to death. There’s even a law against gay people. On the contrary, these types of treatment in disparity with ours are more ruthlessly cruel and dare I say barbaric.

Correspondingly, in accordance with the survey conducted by US-based Pew Research Center, the Philippines had a high percentage score in terms of acceptance of homosexuals. Our score even ranked higher than the USA's where gay marriage is legal.

All the same, there is no denying the fact that to this day, LGBT Filipinos are violated by pervasive acts of bigotry that infringes on their fundamental rights. For the LGBT residing in homophobic countries, they’re living a nightmare. These people have to endure this on a daily basis. And if you think for a moment that this brutality doesn't happen in the Philippines, you are wrong.

According to the Philippine LGBT Hate Crime Watch, there have been already 164 LGBT-related killings in the Philippines from 1996 to June 2012. These victims weren't just killed. They suffered horrible deaths; these poor Filipinos were tortured, suffocated, dismembered, burnt alive, raped, shot or stabbed to death. While it may seem that the Philippines appears to be gay-friendly, the same research center stated that, “65% of Filipinos stated that homosexuality was immoral.”

As a matter of fact, there are no laws against criminalizing homosexual acts, but there are also no laws protecting gay people from prejudice. Even the basic Anti-Discrimination Act remains pending in the Congress.

A point that is often overlooked is that there is an obvious difference between "accept" and "tolerate". There are only stereotypes that LGBT people are expected to fit in, like being effeminate male comedians or lesbian security guards. If gays work in the army or become a part of the basketball varsity team, it would be an entirely different story. "The moment that we step out and demand rights that heterosexuals enjoy, we become a threat because we no longer fit the stereotype," says Ron De Vera of the IDAHO Manila Network.

As has been noted, in our honest opinion, we believe that the title "most LGBT friendly country" should not be taken at face value. How could a country be labeled as the most gay-friendly country in Asia when there are hundreds of LGBT being harassed, abused and killed? How can we when there are politicians who proclaim that gays are worse than animals? If we truly wish to embody and live up to that "name", we still have a long way to go.

They say ignorance is bliss, but if that ignorance comes with a cost, and that cost is life, would you still be able to live your life while staying apathetic to your surroundings? Would you still be able to call yourself human? Instead of avoiding the topic, it is better to educate people and confront it directly to put the matter in perspective. We believe that it is necessary and relevant for all people to recognize and become involved with the existence of LGBT people no matter how small in quantity they are. They are of all races, all ages, all religions; they are children, siblings, partners, teachers, workers, citizens, and whether you know it or accept it, they are family, friends, and neighbors.

Have you ever wanted to be a different person? Not a different soul—no, but rather a physical body? What if I tell you that you can? The catch here is that, apart from the neck up, you can have a different physique. Now the question stands: would you?

If you’ve ever seen or read Frankenstein, then you may be able to relate with the concept that I will be introducing. Resembling Frankenstein, who was an experimental product, built from scraps of organs and tendons; modern age researchers are attempting a similar biologically-challenging project. However, instead of being flashed with lightning like Frankenstein, they’re undertaking a more precise and realistic procedure, with human lives at stake. What’s more? They are apparently attempting the world’s first human head transplant either this year or by 2018.

Human head transplants have been dated back roughly in the 1950’s with animals being the variables, and the results of which have not been very promising. Nonetheless, Dr. Sergio Canavero, an Italian neurosurgeon and the leading player in this unprecedented endeavor, isn’t deterred in the least. His agenda in spearheading this surgery is to cleanse people plagued with cancer and allow paralyzed individuals to walk again.
Still, not taking into account the backlash from skeptical experts and the palpable controversy, there are loopholes in the transplant that can result to harrowing repercussions. To begin with, the lack of supporting success from previous experiments hints at an extremely low success rate; moreover, during the surgery, the neck and spinal cord of both bodies will be severed in order for the swap to work, therefore, if ever that the operation comes to naught, it will be sure-fire demise for the human patient. And in the event that it doesn’t, with the risk of rejection, it is still uncertain whether the spinal cords will actually connect.

I can only conclude my two focal reservations regarding this experiment. Primarily, when it boils down to conceivability, the human head transplant gives the impression of a “high risk, high return” gamble. It is daunting, and as many critics have stated, is “too outlandish.” Likewise, another hurdle will be the painstaking ethical considerations. After all, just because we can (in this case, swap heads), doesn’t mean we should. In principle, this experiment is a clear defiance to pious beliefs, and in the long run, justification will become a tedious problem.

Yet, when all is said and done, it is fairly stimulating to think of the possibility of a real “Frankenstein”, and what infinitesimal possibilities it can imply for the human society, most especially in the medical field.

Sensibly, Dr. Canavero’s revolutionary research will need collective acceptance aside from scientific methodology as footing to be utilized for therapeutic purposes.

One of the noteworthy upshots invoked by the rise of social media is the formation of an era of political correctness. By now, it’s common to see public discussions and broadcasted opinions regarding ethical issues dotting your timeline.
And for the most part, it’s blameless. Society is stepping up to becoming more sensitive regarding timely issues that deserve appropriate responsiveness and are dealt with integrity.

The problem, however, is that people tend to get carried away.
It’s Facebook, it’s Twitter—of course I can post here. Or so it seems. You can, obviously, but should you? Social media isn’t a platform apt for debate, and before you say that you only want to share and raise awareness, keep in mind that a moral issue needs profound deliberation along with unprejudiced evidence, and a simple—and frankly, unsolicited—input of judgment from someone indirectly involved seems undependable.

Moreover, if you’ve been riding on your “I have the right” trump card, then you need to be knocked a little off your high horse. Facing the facts, everyone has the right of free speech, but if you think you have the right as an employee to curse your company or the right as a human being to make defamatory commentaries about a politician, then they also have the right to sue you. It doesn’t matter whether what you say is true or not, but how you handle the situation and publicize it reflects how belligerently careless you are. Discretion, accompanied by some indispensable tact, will do you wonders lawfully.

The problem these days is that it’s easy to just jump aboard the bandwagon of warranted hate; there’re people with fingers itching to add their own two cents. The common trend with this ongoing societal rage is to go with the flow. You feel compelled to write about the injustice, because you are allowed to and, “everyone’s doing it.” So you make a post even if it brings nothing to the table. Consequently, this spurs on a ripple effect for other people who feel obligated to pitch in; otherwise they’ll seem apathetic, ignorant, and superficial.

The bottom line is: it’s redundant. They’re only digging a deeper hole, further aggravating the status quo instead of stopping the bleeding. If one article said all that needed to be said, then learn from it, share it, retweet it, make it a conversation starter with your family or friends, start a private forum; if there’s no need to rave about it, then don’t. Just as Ayana Tolentino, opinion writer of Young Star, had put it: “Without considering if we simply speak for the sake of speaking – we miss a golden opportunity for introspection.”

Still, not all posts are toxic and some can even be substance for motivation and persuasion. The key is to only make meaningful engagements, unlike a parrot who only echoes the words of others. Above all else, silence is golden. Know when your words will hold greater meaning.