Two years ago — before the term 鈥渇ake news鈥 became common — countless people fell for a false narrative that vilified the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) and canonized the app-based ride-sharing company Uber. The disinformation arose after the universally hated government agency had announced the need to register transport network companies (TNC) like Uber so that they could be taxed and regulated. It erroneously claimed that LTFRB was doing so because it was starting its own business offering a similar service.
Worse, public sympathy was hijacked as commuters were fed the incendiary rhetoric of how Uber was so much better than other modes of public transportation (true), and how government was out to kill it (not true). The person mainly responsible for that fake news was famously called out by a lawyer in a memorable Facebook exchange that was both entertaining and sad.
Twenty-four months later, we鈥檙e still witnessing the same legal standoff between Uber and LTFRB. In a nutshell, the agency is threatening to cancel Uber鈥檚 accreditation and right to operate in the country if the latter doesn鈥檛 comply with the requirements the former has laid down for TNCs. The bone of contention is that the tech company continues 鈥渢o accept additional accreditation of TNVS (transport network vehicle services) and/or activation of accounts鈥 in spite of LTFRB鈥檚 unequivocal order to halt driver activation.
Most recently, Uber was levied a P5-million fine for deploying colorum (illegal) drivers and cars. To be fair, main rival Grab had been guilty of the same and was penalized the same amount. The LTFRB peeps must be so frustrated already that they are now spewing fancy words. For instance, they describe the violation as 鈥渃ontumacious,鈥 which means 鈥渟tubbornly or willfully disobedient to authority.鈥 Which, come to think of it, is in keeping with Uber鈥檚 global reputation as an organization that regularly and deliberately flouts the law. I actually won鈥檛 be surprised if there鈥檚 a page in the company鈥檚 handbook that states: 鈥淒isregard the law now and just deal with it later.鈥
But how the company deals with the issue is incredibly amusing. It鈥檚 a classic lesson in PR crisis management — if you鈥檙e a fan of Donald Trump and his twisted enablers, who frequently resort to alternative facts and dodge the real problem in question. The aforementioned fake-news source from 2015 is now being hailed as a 鈥渉ero鈥 for supposedly taking up the cudgels for poor commuters who will be deprived of an excellent transport service should LTFRB shut down Uber. Make no mistake: This so-called influencer is an advocate for Uber, not for the common good. Working with him now is the same guy (also mentioned above) who rebuked him online, because said guy is now Uber鈥檚 policy head. Together, they鈥檙e putting on a show in front of the Senate, on TV, on social media and for everyone willing to surrender critical thinking in favor of a misleading trope designed to demonize government and rile the public.
We should find it alarming that Uber has prominently figured in numerous legal conflicts around the world, not just here. It has been banned in many countries for its refusal to play by the rules. That there鈥檚 a whole Wikipedia page dedicated solely to 鈥淯ber protests and legal actions鈥 should enlighten the company鈥檚 most fanatical defenders.
Let me be clear: The LTFRB has sucked in nearly the entirety of its existence. Just look at all the dilapidated and smoke-belching public-utility vehicles on the road. Whatever loathing the agency is experiencing now is largely its own fault. It doesn鈥檛 take much to fan the flames of animosity toward something that is already widely reviled. A philandering, thieving city mayor would probably beat LTFRB in approval ratings.
But all of this doesn鈥檛 mean the agency isn鈥檛 right in its efforts to regulate TNCs. Please stop with the dismissive 鈥渞egulate reckless jeepney drivers and criminal taxi drivers first鈥 argument. That is its own separate issue. This is the same ploy a corrupt politician uses when caught red-handed: 鈥淲hy me? Why not this congressman and that senator who are far more crooked?鈥 All of a sudden, dude鈥檚 a victim.
Guys, Uber isn鈥檛 the victim here. Don鈥檛 fall for it. Uber is a business. Anyone who thinks it cares about fixing our public-transport mess is delusional. In fact, the unabated addition of Uber (and Grab) cars on the road only exacerbates it. And if its drivers are allowed to operate unchecked, they will soon start behaving like the very cab drivers Uber customers detest.
Does Uber provide superior transport service? Yes. Is it the best thing to happen to our daily commute? Sure. Should it be allowed to continue doing business here? By all means.
But Uber ought to start respecting the law, and stop turning public opinion against government. It needs to be regulated and taxed, plain and simple. Just because 鈥減eople love it鈥 doesn鈥檛 excuse it from abiding by legit business regulations. LTFRB won鈥檛 always get it right. It is still catching its breath trying to keep up with a new transportation business model. But it has to do its job of regulating everyone who wants to engage in public conveyance. Drop the telenovela script and fall in line just like everyone else.
You may e-mail the author at [email protected].


