MTRCB chair Lala Sotto asserts no unfair treatment to ‘It’s Showtime’
Lala Sotto. Image: screengrab from YouTube/Ogie Diaz
Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB) chair Diorella “Lala” Sotto-Antonio dismissed accusations of unfair treatment to “It’s Showtime” following the regulatory board’s decision to suspend the noontime show.
Lala, daughter of noontime show “E.A.T.” host and former Senate President Vicente “Tito” Sotto III, underscored that the suspension is not yet final as the MTRCB gave “It’s Showtime” a chance to file a motion for reconsideration.
“With others, pwede naman na-suspend na kanina pa lang (they could have been suspended right away) but no—again, in the spirit of fairness—we are giving them the chance kaya hindi sila (that is why they were not) suspended today,” Lala said in an exclusive interview with GMA reporter Nelson Canlas for “24 Oras” on Tuesday, Sept. 5. “We will wait for its finality.”
Lala then addressed the frequent netizen remarks regarding the matter after Canlas asked, “Ang sabi po sa isang comment ay pinag-iinitan niyo daw po ang ‘It’s Showtime.’ Totoo po ba ito?”
(One of the comments claims that you are unfair to It’s Showtime. Is this true?)
“No, that is not true,” the MTRCB chair answered. “Siguro natural lang naman sa mga supporters ang maging gano’n ang pakiramdam kasi siguro naririnig nila na parating nare-report.” (I think it’s just normal for supporters to feel that way especially when they always hear reports about it.)
“But, hindi po kasalanan ng MTRCB ang violations na ginagawa nila,” she stressed. (But, the show’s violations are not MTRCB’s fault.)
The MTRCB earlier issued its decision to suspend ABS-CBN’s “It’s Showtime” for 12 airing days due to show hosts Vice Ganda and Ion Perez’s alleged “indecent acts.” In a separate statement, the regulatory board said that Lala inhibited from voting on the suspension of the Kapamilya show to ensure that board members would “exercise their independent judgment.”
ABS-CBN has since announced that it will file a motion for reconsideration as it maintained “there was no violation of pertinent law.” /ra
