14/10/2026
EDITORIAL | When a Media Directory Leaves Out Media
A media directory is supposed to inform the public, not raise questions about who deserves to be included.
The Cebu Media Directory 2026 infographic, circulated in August, presents itself as a quick reference to newspapers, radio stations, television networks, and digital news platforms. Yet DotTV Network and DYCM are conspicuously absent.
The omission raises a legitimate question: What standards were used to determine which media organizations made the list?
DotTV is not merely a digital platform. It reaches audiences through Cignal Channel 107 and CineCebu Channel 155, operates alongside DYCM radio, and maintains provincial station partnerships in Davao, Zamboanga, and Bohol. The network also has a dedicated beat reporter covering Capitol-related developments since day one.
Beyond its broadcast reach, DotTV has recorded nearly 70 million views in just 5 months… reflecting the substantial audience engagement its platforms have generated. Such a figure makes the absence of the network from a directory of Cebu media outlets even more noteworthy.
Our presence in Capitol coverage is hardly a secret. Neither are our editorial positions on Capitol affairs, which have drawn public criticism and even inspired memes featuring our logo.
We are not claiming that our editorial stance explains our exclusion. That would be premature without evidence. But neither should the omission be dismissed without reasonable scrutiny, especially since the infographic has been circulating since August, leaving its compilers time to review and correct the listing.
Mistakes happen, and no directory can claim absolute completeness. But a publication presented as a reference for the public carries a responsibility to apply clear, consistent, and transparent criteria.
If DotTV and DYCM were inadvertently omitted, a correction would be the simplest and most professional response. If specific criteria led to their exclusion, those criteria deserve to be explained.
This is not about demanding recognition. It is about fairness, accuracy, and the responsibility that comes with presenting a directory intended to represent Cebu’s media landscape.
Nearly 70 million views, television carriage on two platforms, radio operations, provincial partnerships, and an established reporting presence are not claims of entitlement. They are facts about the network’s operations that merit consideration in any comprehensive assessment of the local media landscape.
We can take the omission with a sense of humor. Being left out of a list is hardly the end of the world.
But in journalism, omissions can be as revealing as inclusions.
And sometimes, the most important question about a directory is not simply who made the list, but who did not—and why.
— END —
