Mainstream media and IBON Foundation

Why Does Mainstream Media Always Choose IBON Foundation on Economic Matters?

If you've been tracking Philippine news for years, you might have observed this ongoing trend: when the economy is in the headlines—whether GDP growth, inflation, or poverty—IBON Foundation is usually quoted or featured. 

From Wikipedia

For others, though, this ubiquitous visibility brings more than curiosity—particularly because news articles and government security reports have characterized IBON Foundation as an "above-ground" arm of the CPP–NPA, the communist rebel organization that has been active in the Philippines.

Mainstream Media's Go-To "Economic Expert"

And in fairness, there is a pragmatic reason why IBON is seen everywhere. Journalists have them on speed dial because:

• They have instant press releases with information and graphs.
• They present tough, quotable opposition to official government views.
• They have a long history as an outsider's think tank promoting labor rights, equality of income, and protectionist economic policies.

And for the newsroom operating on tight deadlines, IBON is a handy option. But convenience must not stand in for caution—particularly when a source is affiliated with, as credible reports indicate, a four-decade old armed insurgency.

CPP–NPA Allegations

The Philippine Armed Forces (AFP), erstwhile military officials, and various in-depth news articles have characterized IBON Foundation as a component of the legal, underground apparatus of the Communist Party of the Philippines – New People's Army (CPP–NPA).

IBON has consistently refuted these claims, but the overlap is hard for its critics to deny:

• Parallel talking points and jargon between IBON pronouncements and CPP statements.
• Historical affiliations of some IBON members with leftist or activist organizations with links to the communist movement.
• Positions for advocacy coinciding with the CPP's political platform.

Whether or not one finds these views sympahtetic, the security issues cannot be ignored.

Same Color Politics

It's not just about economics, critics claim—its about ideology.

Some media are seen to lean in the same political "color" as IBON: left-leaning, anti-establishment, and usually very critical of U.S. relations and market liberalization.

This convergence accounts for why:

1. IBON is most frequently called upon for "alternative" data with little equal time for other economists.
2. Their criticisms are aired while voices in favor of reforms are marginalized.
3. The same anti-administration narratives are recycled across both IBON and some media.

The Risks of Overreliance

Even without the CPP–NPA charges, there are risks in having any single source of economic commentary:

• It limits the public's exposure to varied views.
• It runs the risk of infusing partisan ideology into purportedly objective reporting.
• It can harm media credibility if audiences perceive reporting as politically slanted—or better yet, sympathetic to groups linked to insurgents.

Moving Forward

If mainstream media wishes to maintain trust:

1. Expand the pool of experts – Feature economists from universities, think tanks, and business circles with a range of views.
2. Make disclosure – When quoting IBON, state its reported political affiliations so people can judge for themselves.
3. Encourage genuine debate – Allow the public to hear contrary analyses back to back, not separately.

For the people: stay skeptical. Don't take economic claims at face value—verify the source, check the agenda, and cross-reference with other sound data.

Last Thought:

Assuming the reports about IBON Foundation as an above-ground CPP–NPA organization are true, mainstream media's uncritical use of it for economic analysis is ultimately not just lazy reporting—it's potentially serving a group with decades of history of armed struggle against the state.

Equitable reporting is mediated by many voices and complete transparency if those voices carry political or insurgent affiliations.