Obscenity depends on the reader
“THERE is no perfect definition of obscenity,” said the prosecutor who threw out complaints filed against Cebu tabloids Superbalita and Banat.
But he cited basic guidelines set down in the US landmark case of Miller v. California.
The test of obscenity is whether an “average person applying contemporary standards would find the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest”.
Also, it depends whether the work describes in a “patently offensive way” sexual conduct defined by law, and whether the work, “taken as a whole” lacks serious literary , artistic, political or scientific value.
To Prosecutor Ferdinand Collantes, acting Cebu city prosecutor, the tabloids did not show “hard core” sexual conduct in its controversial columns “From Junquera with Love” and “Wildflower”.
Collantes said he had to study the “full context” of the material and not rely on mere claims.
He said column writers used double entendre which is a figure of speech “devised to be understood in either of two ways.”
“Often the first (more obvious) meaning is straightforward while the second meaning remained in the realm of imagination,” he said.
“This use of words may be playful, witty, mischievous, and may contain sexual undertones but not per se pornographic or obscene. It is left to the understanding of the reader to interpret the meaning,” he added.
The tabloids used words like “buhi mong isda, tuskig na kaayo si Junior, nabuak ang langob, and pagsulod-gawas sa birhen pa kaayo nga langob.”
He said some readers may fail to detect its innuendos and actually find it entertaining.
“The state cannot control the minds or thoughts of the readers who patronize these kind of publications and reading materials as these are not hardcore pornography. As the fantasies and sphere of credulity of the reader is his own and beyond the realm of control by the state as we practice great prudence to safeguard the freedom of speech, expression, and press,” he said.
“In all of these scenarios, readers, including children may have no understanding of whether these words as used in context did or otherwise describe sexual organs or activities,” the prosecutor said.
When the CCAIB first complained by writing to the two tabloids in 2010, the material continued to run.
In June 1, 2011, the board invited editors of both tabloids to a conference where it was disclosed that the articles were continuously published to raise the sales and catered to the lustful interest of certain readers.
The CCAIB said the editors agreed to “tone down” the language or eliminate it. Then in the next regular meeting of the CCAIB, members read the June 7 and 8 colunms of “From Junquera with Love”, which described a couple’s tight embrace and references to the size of the genitals of the man and woman, and included initmiate dialog of a couple having sex.
The “Wildflower” columns in the June 9 and 10 issues of Banat News were also quoted in the complaint, describing a man and woman in a similar situation.
In its defense, Sun.Star SuperBalita’s counter-affidavit said the publication possess “serious literary value with moral lessons and at time rather entertain or amuse.”
They said the stories, as a whole, have a redeeming value.
Sun.Star SuperBalita said one of their columns mentioned a wife who was unhappy because of unfulfilled needs.
The tabloid said “sexual satisfaction” is taboo in discussion but it is a “natural need that cannot be neglected in reality.”
“The appreciation of whether or not a publication is obscene or indecent should be based on the evaluation of the article in question as a whole,” Sun.Star SuperBalita said.
Banat News said the complaint against them is “insufficient” and that their publications were covered by “freedom of expresion.”/Ador Vincent S. Mayol
