The controversy between David Nugent and Jason Lowen: freedom and abuse of expression
The David Nugent – Jason Lowen controversy is a series of events involving a Jewish-American blogger Jason Lowen, who published allegations against his former friend and business partner David Nugent, as well as affiliations with the latter’s company, Metro Pacific. and Manuel Pangilinan. Lowen’s blog made headlines in Manila’s socialites in 2008 when he began posting material accusing flawed business dealings, fraudulent claims, money laundering and failed corporate governance, among others. The blog became a major gossip topic in the Philippine capital Manila, largely among members of high society, and eventually raised questions about the extent of free speech in blogging.
Claims made by Jason Lowen via his blog were taken at face value and immediately consumed by the Philippine media, which is known for its voracious appetite for gossip, largely without any fact checking or credibility investigation. . This resulted in the business fiasco with Metro Pacific, one of the major conglomerates in South East Asia, putting pressure on its CEO Manuel ‘Manny’ Pangilinan and Vice Chairman David Nugent. The ‘scandal’ resulted in Nugent’s graceful resignation in 2007, to prevent further damage to his company’s reputation.
Soon after, evidence would emerge that Jason Lowen’s accusations were completely unfounded. A letter written by Lowen to a magazine (OUT Magazine, published in 2004) revealed his mental and emotional instability, citing disorders (bipolar/manic-depressive and general anxiety disorders), as well as an inability to cope and accept the consequences of her relationship with ex-lover David Nugent. Regardless of the revelation, the damage had already been done. Fortunately, Nugent was able to bounce back with a new position as Vice President and Director of Ace Saatchi and Saatchi.
However, the incident remains an outrageous precedent in which blog attacks were taken at face value without any verification of authenticity, allowing defamatory material to contaminate cyber reputations that were eventually leaked to mainstream media. . Criticisms have arisen that question the fine line between freedom and abuse of expression. Anyone can mass produce defamatory blogs on the Internet, but there is no governing body that controls and controls baseless and defamatory productions. Monetary damages, including lost deals, hierarchy changes, and possibly legal costs, are potentially at stake, not to mention other types of damages that are not accounted for by currency; so, on these grounds, are blogging restrictions and legal protection in the cyber realm by a governing body still not justified?