Veteran broadcast journalist Arnold Clavio has called out political blogger Krizette Laureta Chu, columnist Mon Tulfo, and an unnamed vlogger for allegedly spreading misleading content that targeted fellow GMA News reporter Mariz Umali.
In an Instagram post, Clavio criticized Chu for reposting a video taken by another vlogger during the International Criminal Court proceedings in The Hague, where Umali was heard commenting about former Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea.
The video went viral after being interpreted to mean that Umali called Medialdea “matanda na” (too old), when in fact, she said “mata niya” (his eyes).
“So hindi siya [Chu] ang main source ng video. Ni-repost lang niya ito para mang-intriga at siraan ang mainstream media,” Clavio said. “Pati na ang umano’y vlogger na kumuha kay Mariz ay dapat ding humingi ng tawad dahil sa malisyoso niyang post resulta ng maling pakakarinig.”
Clavio was firm that both Chu and the original vlogger owe Umali a public apology, especially after the misinformation led to online bashing and anger from supporters of former President Rodrigo Duterte.
He also singled out Mon Tulfo, who shared the same narrative and posted disparaging remarks about Umali. “Kung may natitira pang respeto sa katawan ni Tulfo, dapat din siyang humingi ng apology kay Mariz. At bilang matagal nang mamamahayag, iyon ang nararapat dahil pinatulan niya ay FAKE NEWS!” Clavio emphasized.
Clavio lamented how the recent hearing at the House of Representatives exposed a growing trend among some content creators of sharing unverified information online—something he said is far from the standards upheld by mainstream journalism.
View this post on Instagram
Supporting Clavio’s sentiments, fellow Kapuso journalist Joel Zobel also chimed in on social media, saying: “Dapat ‘yan kinakasuhan. Purveyors of fake news!”
As of now, none of the individuals mentioned have issued a direct apology to Umali.
While Chu apologized during the congressional hearing, her statement did not address Umali specifically. It remains to be seen whether further action—such as legal proceedings—will be pursued.
