Remulla accused the blog of promoting Romualdez’s case

Remulla described Juan Luna Blog’s commentary as propaganda supporting Romualdez’s bid for bail. He accused it of trying to change the public narrative surrounding the proceedings.

The report quoting him does not identify a specific passage from the blog and show evidence disproving it. It documents his accusation, rather than a finding against the writer.

The commentary concerns a pending plunder case

Government prosecutors filed a plunder case against Romualdez and three others in September. They alleged that he accumulated approximately ₱7.4 billion in kickbacks from government projects between 2022 and 2025.

Those are prosecution allegations. Reporting them does not establish that the accused committed the offense. The blog’s discussion of testimony and bail relates to proceedings in which the prosecution’s evidence is being contested.

Remulla referred to the Sandiganbayan without specifying a court action

“Hopefully the Sandiganbayan is listening,” Remulla said before discussing the blog’s coverage.

The published account does not specify what he wanted the court to do. It does not report a motion against the blogger or a court order addressing the posts. His public statement alone therefore does not establish that the Sandiganbayan has taken action against Juan Luna Blog.

The office announced plans to seek removal of misleading posts

The Ombudsman’s office said it would communicate with the Department of Information and Communications Technology and social media platforms about removing allegedly misleading content concerning pending cases.

Remulla also discussed false claims about his health. The report does not establish that Juan Luna Blog published those claims. It does not confirm that the announced coordination has resulted in removal of the blog’s posts.

Propaganda and disinformation describe different things

Propaganda is communication intended to influence an audience. It can use selected facts, emotional language or false claims. The label alone does not establish whether a particular statement is true or false.

UNESCO distinguishes misinformation—false information shared without an intention to cause harm—from disinformation, which involves deliberately created false information intended to cause harm.

Establishing disinformation therefore involves examining both the claim and the evidence of intent. Political preference or disagreement with a writer’s interpretation does not settle those questions.