When news of the drowning of two athletes broke, the internet was immediately flooded not just with expressions of sympathy for the families of the deceased. It exploded with rage, against Ateneo de Manila University, its president, its basketball coaches and practically anyone who had to do with Ateneo. The condemnation was so severe that it felt like a lynching. All sorts of opinions were expressed with speculations on the maltreatment of the players and even that they were fitted with weights that helped drown them (not true).

This was before a more detailed investigation was carried out. Even when the details were still being filled in, netizens still continued pounding on the alleged abusers, coaches’ negligence and accusations of hazing and other supposed misdeeds of those being pilloried.

Before I get accused of bias, let me state that I have never been an Atenean, nor do I have any connection with Ateneo de Manila nor any Ateneo institution.

This mindset of hitting the keys before knowing the facts is now the reflex reaction of many Filipinos. Whatever happened to the concept of “Innocent until proven guilty?” Justice is now dispensed by anyone who can take to the keyboard and pronounce the subject guilty without hesitation. This is mob justice as in older times.

The same happened when a doctor took to the internet to denounce what he called a miscarriage of justice when he was suspended for six months by the medical specialty organization that he belongs to due to his being found guilty of maligning a fellow internist, who also happened to be its former president like himself. He did not state why he was suspended, and was apparently angling for sympathy among his followers.

Follower after follower denounced the decision, not even knowing what the organization stands for and what it does, which is the regulation of its members to maintain harmony among colleagues and protect the public. They didn’t know about the process that it followed, yet they not only expressed sympathy for this doctor but flailed away at the august body that safeguards not only its members but the patients as well. I’m sure its officers were shell-shocked by the vociferous outrage directed at them, even when they followed a very measured and standard way of hearing out both sides, accuser and accused alike.

All they know is that the person they’re following online claims to be a self-proclaimed health reform advocate, as if being such is a license to violate others’ rights and persons. They can’t seem to discern the difference between what the person says and what he actually does, or the motives behind his stance and actions. They didn’t care either about the person he had disparaged and accused of selling his soul to the devil by accepting bribes from drug companies.

Anyone can claim to be a health reform advocate. But is it right to profit from someone else’s reputation being trampled on? There are many other health advocates who go through the proper channels in pressing their causes. It should not be done online just to get likes and followers and possibly get noticed and be appointed to a juicy position. There are legitimate ways to pursue your passion for health equity and justice.

This person did not even pursue his legitimate right to appeal the verdict. He just went ahead and vented online crying persecution, from the organization that gave him the ultimate honor of the presidency. Now, the former presidents are pushing back, and he still maintained his belligerent stance towards it.

There are many other cases where judgments were rendered online without the benefit of hearing the other side. There are always two sides to the story, and sometimes, there are other angles to consider. Don’t be too hasty in pronouncing guilt of persons without knowing the whole story. That is social justice.

So, you see, it pays to first know the facts before spouting on social media. Cancel culture is not real life. Nobody gets jailed or dismissed from his job by being cancelled even by thousands of online accounts. Cases still have to go through the proper channels.

The same goes for the case of the drowned Ateneo basketball players. Sympathize with the bereaved families. Bemoan the loss of life and future of the deceased and their families. Restraint is the proper attitude. Wait for the facts to emerge, witnesses to talk and investigations to finish.

Those concerned are accused of not speaking up when they have to abide by the legal provisions of investigation, court trials if indicated and go through the legal system to establish innocence or guilt for that matter.

Anything else is just noise. As they say, get a life. You cannot live in the cloud forever.