The article is entitled “Capitol SP ‘accepts with reservation’ requests from guv’s aide” and landed on the front page of today’s edition of The News Today.

She writes that “Numerous referrals and indorsements in the Sanggunian Panlalawigan (SP) now hangs though “accepted with reservation.”

What does she mean by that? Hanging in a clothesline? Hanging from a noose? And by the way, there should be no “s” in the word “hang”, since she made a reference to “numerous referrals and indorsements.”

The next paragraph only succeeds in murdering the English language.

She says the “SP as a matter of course have (sic) the respective concerns calendared in the regular sessions. Yet with no SP resolution as of now on the legal status of Mejorada, all and any communication (sic) remains (sic) as such —hanging and accepted with reservation.

This kind of writing is an editor’s nightmare. If such bad and sloppy writing made it past the editor’s desk, then I can imagine the article in its original form!

That’s not all.

“Mejorada is the only choice of Governor Tupas for the position of Provincial Administrator.”

I have only one word for this kind of writing — STUPID!

How many choices can a governor make for the position of Provincial Administrator?

“His re-appointment though came under fire after failing to get the SP nod.”

Her writing is not only lousy, but she also can’t get her facts straight. What re-appointment is talking about? Does she know of a re-appointment that was submitted to the SP? How can the SP give its approval when there is no re-appointment?

There are more examples of bad writing that masquerades as objective reporting.

But this one is a classic: “Mejorada assumes (sic) the post of the Provincial Administrator complete with all the authority openly and publicly displayed.”

How else is authority exercised? Keep it in the closet? Or give instructions and directives in whispers?

Hibionada also tries to make it appear that members of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan are placed at the “mercy” of Mejorada.

Is that the complaint of the board members?

Nobody seems to have raised a howl of protest among board members.

Hibionada violates a cardinal rule of journalism in which reporters attribute opinions to their sources, whether named or unnamed.

The truth is that Hibionada wrote a demolition piece to paint an ugly picture of Mejorada as provincial administrator. She is carrying out the wishes of her principals, politicians who have an ax to grind against Mejorada.

It is sad to see a nice newspaper like The News Today allowing itself to be used by Hibionada for her public relations business. A PR woman like her should be honest enough with herself to admit that her writing is biased, slanted, and worse, bad and sloppy.

The next time she writes about Mejorada, she should devote more time to edit her article and make sure those stupid mistakes and lousy writing do no show up in her work.