The Supreme Court (SC) has upheld the dismissal of a complaint filed by GMA Network, Inc. against ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corporation over alleged defamatory statements tied to a long-running dispute on television ratings manipulation.

In a decision penned by Associate Justice Japar Dimaampao, the Court’s Third Division denied two consolidated petitions: GMA’s complaint for damages and ABS-CBN’s counterclaims.

The ruling affirmed earlier decisions of both the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals.

The controversy traces back to 2007, when ABS-CBN contracted AGB Nielsen to provide audience measurement data for Mega Manila and other key urban areas.

The agreement required strict confidentiality of “Panel Homes,” or selected households used to monitor TV viewership, to preserve the integrity of ratings data.

ABS-CBN later received reports alleging that individuals linked to GMA had attempted to influence these households by encouraging residents to watch GMA programs in exchange for incentives.

Testimony from a GMA employee in Iloilo supported claims that such efforts were directed internally, with monetary and grocery rewards offered to participants.

Further complicating the issue, AGB Nielsen General Manager Maya Reforma publicly acknowledged in a radio interview that the Panel Homes had been tampered with.

ABS-CBN subsequently aired segments referencing Reforma’s statements, which became the basis of GMA’s complaint.

GMA argued that ABS-CBN distorted Reforma’s remarks and falsely implied that GMA manipulated ratings. However, the Court found that the statements aired were “qualified privileged” communications, meaning they are not actionable unless proven malicious or made in bad faith.

The Court held that the utterances constitute a fair and true report, noting that ABS-CBN’s statements were based on documented evidence, including Reforma’s interview and AGB Nielsen’s analysis.

The High Court also emphasized the absence of malice, a key element in defamation cases.

It ruled that ABS-CBN’s reporting fell under the fair comment doctrine, which protects commentary on matters of public interest.

As a major broadcast network, GMA was deemed a public figure subject to scrutiny.

The SC rejected GMA’s invocation of Article 361 of the Revised Penal Code on proof of the truth, reiterating that truth is a valid defense in instances where remarks are directed against a public figure.

The Court likewise dismissed ABS-CBN’s counterclaims, stating that GMA had sufficient basis to believe the statements were defamatory when it filed the complaint.