Janette Toral - GMANews.TV

Internet and Mobile Advertising Code of Ethics

The Internet and Mobile Marketing Association of the Philippines (IMMAP) recently released its Internet and Mobile Marketing Code of Ethics that aims to create a standard for Philippine practitioners to observe and be a means for self-regulation.

This policy paper is due for ratification and recognition by the AdBoard of the Philippines. Once done, all Internet and mobile advertising industry complaints shall be referred to IMMAP for resolution.

Its salient features are:

No to false advertisement. Deceptive, false, and misleading advertisements are prohibited under the Consumer Act of the Philippines. Advertisements that are disguised as prompt messages or forms giving you a perception that you won even though you haven't are some examples of these.

Ads directed to children. Any personal information must be done with parental consent especially those that ask specific information that are not usually provided to strangers.

Discriminating ads. Internet and mobile ads that discriminates or assails a group, organization, or person is not permitted whether in public, private, or protected form.

Sexual, violence, and illegal content. Ads that promote drugs, obscenity, vulgarity, offensive presentations, and dangerous practices are not allowed.

Fake products. Association members should watch out for advertisements being placed in their site or assignments of products that are fake, misrepresentation, or counterfeit in nature.

No hate campaigns. This is especially true for political advertisements.

Testimonial claims, quotations or reference to research data, and before or after actual comparison must be truthful and factual.

Promotions. Terms and conditions must be clearly presented. It must conform with government regulations.

Drugs, devices, and treatment advertisements must all be done with BFAD approval. Non-prescription drugs should always carry the advice "if symptoms persist, consult your physician." Claims of product being safe, without risk, effective, among others are not permitted unless it is consistent with product labeling indications.

Tobacco products are not allowed to be advertised online or offline.

Using Philippine standards and symbols like the country's flag should be done in compliance with relevant laws such as the Republic Act 8491 – Flag and Heraldic Code of the Philippines. There are numerous online ads today that uses our country's flag. Online media site should be wary of accepting ads of this nature as the law does not allow it.

Email, text messages, and newsletters must be done with user consent. Identity of the sender must be clear along with instructions on how to unsubscribe should the user no longer want to receive future messages.

It will be a challenge to carry this out as it will affect all Philippines-entities who uses the Internet and mobile phone to advertise. However, rather than relying solely on government for resolution of concerns, the private sector taking the lead through self-regulation is a welcome move.

I look forward to your insights.

Filing an NTC consumer complaint

Last May 6, 2007, the National Telecommunications Commission issued Memorandum Circular No. 05-06-2007 that further explains the agency's consumer protection guidelines.

This policy was created in response to request for clearer guidelines on consumer complaint handling that extends to services of telecommunication entities, value-added service (VAS) providers, like Internet service connection, mobile phone and Internet-related prepaid services, among others. Consumer rights as stated in the circular include:

Right to privacy. Subscriber information shall not disclosed nor use in any other manner without permission.

Right not be charge. A subscriber can only be charged according to the rates, terms, and conditions he or she has agreed to. A consumer can not be charge for the time being during which a continuing or continuous service was interrupted through no fault of the subscriber.

Right to opt-out. Subscribers are entitled to opt out from a post-paid service within 30-days from start or commencement of the subscription. Add-on bundles are not considered as part of the service and may therefore had to be paid for separately and its amount should be clearly stated in the terms and conditions if required to be paid for.

Remaining balance verification. Prepaid subscribers should be given a free mechanism to verify balance credits.

Accurate and timely billing. Post-paid subscribers should receive clear, accurate, complete, and timely billing.

Burden of proof. In relation to complaints pertaining to post-paid billing errors and loss of prepaid credits, telecommunication and VAS entities has the obligation to prove that the complainant made the transaction within 30 days upon receipt of complaint. During this period, pending the investigation, the consumer shall not be required to pay the disputed charge and any other related charges (penalty, late fees, etc.), and no adverse credit report may be made based on that either.

Consumers are expected to file a complaint first with their service providers and keep records of correspondence and phone calls made.

If the complaint is not addressed within 30 days, the consumer has the right to escalate this to the National Telecommunications Commission by filling up a complaint form.

As this is still a new policy, it will take time before it gets updated and will be highly dependent on actual experience by consumers in going through the process.

I look forward to your insight.

Telecommunication data log retention

Telecommunication entities, including value added services and content providers, have important obligations to be transparent and fair to consumers. It is important for users of these services to know their rights and exercise them whenever necessary.

A few months back, I received a complaint from a friend about "disappearing load credits." His inquiries were not answered. I also had my share of bad experiences in this area back in 2006. There was an outage and my prepaid load was not properly credited. After two calls and no concrete action, I decided to just let it go.

I still hope for the creation of an NTC value-added services board someday so that succeeding orders and approval of new technologies will ensure consumer protection as a prerequisite.

Hearing complaints from consumers on various telecom-related services, such as text messages, prepaid card loading, disappearing credits, bad Internet service provider connection, among others, is now common. It is important for consumers to know their rights.

Let me start with National Telecommunications Commission Memorandum Circular 04-06-2007. The need for this regulation started when law enforcement authorities requested help in tracking scams sent through cellphones. At that time, mobile numbers were merely reported and disabled. There was a need to track these scammers live, know where they are for surveillance and arrest.

I believe that scam text messages are not sent from mobile phones directly, but from a GSM modem plugged to a PC that has a database of mobile phone numbers.

These scammers are organized and they enjoy taking advantage of a flawed consumer protection law. Authorities have also no access to telecommunication data.

The same situation is being faced by the NTC and DTI, two agencies that often receive complaints from consumers about disappearing prepaid load.

Consumers now do not believe that providers do not store records of prepaid holders or furnish such information on-demand.

With NTC MC 04-06-2007, providers are required to store for two months records of non-metered services and for four months of everything else.

Note that actual calls and text messages are not being saved here but only basic information such as origin, destination, time, and duration of communications.

Access to this information requires complainants to pass through the NTC or with by getting a court order. This is to ensure that lawful access (section 31) and obligation of confidentiality (section 32) provisions of Republic Act 8792 will be followed.

I will tackle the steps consumers can take to file a complaint at the NTC and their rights in my next post.

Making gov't compliant to the E-Commerce Law

To say that a government agency is compliant to Republic Act 8792 or the E-Commerce Law means that the agency accepts electronic filing, issues electronic approval or permits, accepts electronic payment (for those that collect fees), and issues guidelines for the conduct of such with consultation with their constituency.

The last one is very important because it must be ensured that the e-commerce system that will be put up is usable and is a well-thought of project and is enshrined in an administrative order or memorandum circular of the specific agency.

The program must also be communicated to the entire organization, not only confined to its proponents. It must be ensured that the project will not get replaced by any new leadership that joins the agency.

Without all these in place, any e-government initiative will be unstable.

For quite sometime there was a confusion on how the project gets done, specifically the electronic payment part. High-revenue government agencies ended up having to negotiate with various departments and entities.

Other government agencies, however, whose revenue levels are not at par with the Bureau of Internal Revenue and Bureau of Customs, for example, have a harder time getting the terms and attention they want.

To resolve this, the Department of Finance and Department of Trade and Industry issued a joint department administrative order number 2 (JDAO #2) that prescribes policies and guidelines in the adoption of electronic payment and collection system in government.

All government agencies currently accepting electronic payment are given time up to October 2008 to comply with this guideline. Others who intend to accept electronic payment need to go through the process for proper accreditation. This uniform process intends to ensure that all bases are covered and the government gets the best deal.

There were efforts to have a single government payment system (Note that this project is No. 25) under the Commission on Information and Communications Technology (CICT). I have reservations about its initial model, as the said entity has no mandate, in its executive order charter, nor the NCC for that matter, to collect and process payments on behalf of various government agencies.

Neither does that project have an executive order or administrative order that serves as basis for its undertaking, whereby about P137.7 million have been allotted under the e-government fund and is referred to as the NCC E-Government Portal project (Note that this project is No. 25).

The Philippines still has a long way to go with respect to the implementation of e-commerce in government. The private sector should remain vigilant in monitoring the various e-government initiatives and be vocal in expressing concern on its implementation.

This blog, in its own way, will look into the various ICT projects being undertaken in government and monitor its status. Should you have information to share, you can email me at digitalfilipino@gmail.com

Which is Superior - Law or Executive Order?

The conflicting provisions between the E-Commerce Law and Executive Order 269 creating the Commission on Information and Communications Technology have created a bottleneck in the implementation of e-government and e-commerce in the country.

The E-Commerce Law or Republic Act 8792 mandated the Department of Trade and Industry as its main coordinator (section 29). The reason is, commerce is all about transactions involving businesses and consumers. Thus, DTI's role to coordinate its implementation to facilitate electronic commerce across sectors.

The e-government component (section 27 and 28) is intended to ensure modernization to serve local businesses and consumers better, that leads to applications today such as electronic application of your birth certificate through the NSO, passport renewal through the Internet or phone, among others. There are challenges in various e-government services that I will tackle in the weeks to come.

To facilitate its implementation, the Information Technology and Electronic Commerce Council or ITECC, through Executive Order 264, was created and led by the DTI Secretary to bring together various stakeholders. It was one of the biggest multi-sectoral bodies involving government and the private sector.

When President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo came into power, the executive order creating the body was revised, under Executive Order 18 and made President Arroyo its chairman and the body co-chaired with the DTI secretary and a private sector representative.

The private sector chairman at that time, Bobby Romulo, was also an adviser on international competitiveness to the President. A major revamp happened and eventually the e-government fund was created with an initial funding of nearly P4 billion and P1 billion every year afterwards.

Prior to the 2004 elections, there was a move to abolish ITECC, under Executive Order 334, and transfer its functions to the newly created CICT, through EO 269, under the Office of the President. Instead of giving control to the DTI of the e-government fund, since it was ITECC co-chair, the money was given to CICT. Some speculated that CICT's formation was because of the money.

I think DTI has been sidelined and focused instead its efforts in boosting the outsourcing industry.

Although it is in the power of the President to re-align government functions, the question that comes to mind is which reigns supreme? A law or an executive order? Who is accountable for the implementation of e-government and e-commerce in the country when you have RA 8792 and EO 269. I would like to say that it is still DTI. CICT of course can insist that it is under its turf.

If Congress will only check it will discover that DTI is accountable. CICT, however, holds the big stick and says where the e-government fund goes despite the absence of an updated Government Information System Plan as required by the law's IRR. It sparked my post last week on the lack of clear accountability on e-government implementation today.

Accountability in P10-B e-Government fund

The Commission on Information and Communications Technology, under the Office of the President, is currently working on a roadmap for the information and communications technology sector. I consider this a welcome news, but at the same time, vigilance must be exerted to ensure that this gets done with the interest of the Filipino people in mind.

One component of this big document is the Government Information Systems Plan or GISP. Supposedly, the GISP should serve as basis for all ICT spending in government. Under the implementing rules and regulations of Republic Act 8972 or the E-Commerce Law, the document should have been updated to reflect the e-government requirements and make them compliant under the law.

However, since 2005, the GISP was not updated and most projects being undertaken through the fund in relation to the nearly P10 billion worth of e-government spending is very much ad-hoc. As most of the projects since 2002 are still in progress, hardly is there any audit report to date showing how the fund is used on a per project basis.

There must be clear accountability and responsibility as mandated by existing laws as far as the E-Government Fund is concerned.

For instance, the basis for the creation of the E-Government Fund is a mandate in the E-Commerce Law. It required the Department of Budget and Management to allot a budget from savings to fund the e-government requirements of the law.

The CICT got the task to select projects to be approved, despite the absence of an updated GISP. It is also an active recipient of the fund, amounting to more or less P200 million year after year (based on COA audit report of 2006). The reason behind CICT's task is its being an ICT office and its role in the inevitable formation of the Department of Information and Communications Technology.

To avoid doubts on the processes undertaken by CICT, there should be transparency in the implementation of projects. Decision-making on project selection and the parties involved must be explained. Reports on projects approved, the budget, rationale, and verified status of the projects can be posted on their site.

It has been eight years since the passage of the E-Commerce Law. As to where we are in the various facets of e-commerce, e-government, and ICT shall be the focus of this blog. Thank you to GMANews for making me part of this growing blog network.