The end of PDI era

On 30 June 2025, a significant chapter in the media industry came to a close when the Philippine Daily Inquirer (PDI), the most awarded broadsheet in the country, wrote -30-. In journalism parlance, “-30-” (dash thirty dash) is shorthand for the end of a news story.

Nearly 300 employees in the editorial, business, and administrative departments lost their jobs. Many of them had been with the paper a long time — none, however, at its inception on 9 December 1985 when Eugenia Apostol, Betty Go-Belmonte and Max Soliven founded it. The Prieto family later purchased the newspaper.

By 2017, all the original editorial and business staff, including myself, had retired, leaving the editorial leadership in the hands of newer and less experienced employees.

As the former president of the Philippine Daily Inquirer Employees Union, I witnessed fluctuations in profits, which affected the five-percent profit share of the employees. By the time I retired in 2017, there was no more profit to share with employees.

I never doubted the newspaper would eventually fold up. Between 2008 and 2015, while attending various international journalism fellowships, I witnessed the shift in foreign media from print to digital platforms, making closure inevitable.

When I shared my observations about trends abroad and pointed out that PDI would suffer the same fate, I sensed that my colleagues were skeptical. Their skepticism stemmed not from my statements being unreasonable but from the fear of losing their jobs. In essence, they were in denial.

At the time, artificial intelligence (AI) had not yet made a significant impact on the media landscape in the Philippines. The closure of numerous foreign media bureaus globally indicated the considerable shift, suggesting that preparations for digitalization were underway with the use of AI.

Five years into retirement, I began my shift to digitalization by enrolling in several digital journalism courses and starting my own two digital news platforms. This way, when I finally retired, I could smoothly transition into the new media environment and compete with the more tech-savvy younger generation, even at an old age.

Mobility is the name of the game; consumers now prefer reading the news on their mobile devices, such as smartphones and tablets.

For nearly four decades, PDI shaped the public discourse, covering a range of crucial issues from political events to social injustices. Its bold reporting often held powerful entities to account, making it a critical resource for citizens seeking information and insight. However, economic pressures intensified by the Covid-19 pandemic contributed to the decline of many print publications.

When the late editor-in-chief, Leticia Jimenez-Magsanoc (LJM), a revered figure in the industry, took over in 1991, the PDI continued to lead in sales and journalistic excellence. It was a glorious era for PDI journalism despite facing multiple libel suits.

The events surrounding the downfall of PDI were entirely the responsibility of the business side, not the editorial department. An analysis of its rise and fall that did not mention LJM showed a lack of understanding on the part of one PDI latecomer-turned-columnist of another media outfit.

For him to blame “newsroom dinosaurs, hard-hitting reporters, and union-backed employees” for a flawed business model was simply misguided. The PDI died with LJM. Period.