Social media platforms were flooded with videos, photos, and texts supporting detained former President Rodrigo Duterte, demanding his immediate return from the International Criminal Court (ICC) to the Philippines.
Duterte’s supporters wanted to project an impression that Filipinos disagree with the decision of the government of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr to arrest and hand him over to The Hague.
However, many of these social media posts were based on fabricated information. There was a video of a protest in Serbia that Duterte supporters manipulated to make it appear to be in The Netherlands, with the protesters chanting, “Duterte, Duterte.”
The gullible readily believed it was an authentic video and likely shared the disinformation on their social media accounts.
Some die-hard Duterte fanatics who knew the video was inaccurate happily re-posted and shared the video to win clicks from hoodwinked supporters of the former strongman, hoping to monetize the post.
Any self-respecting journalist would avoid the propaganda, but some journalists, who moonlight as pro-Duterte vloggers, would share and re-post the false information.
On the day Duterte was arrested at Terminal 3 of the Ninoy Aquino International Airport upon his arrival from Hong Kong, hundreds of pages on social media went to work to attack the government and sympathize with the former president.
Authorities said more than 200 social media accounts sprang on Facebook, X, Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube and posted identical messages, saying the arrest was illegal and the government had surrendered Philippine sovereignty to foreigners.
Up to now, pro-Duterte posts have been flooding social media platforms, demonstrating to global audiences that the former president remained immensely popular among the population.
This was not accurate. In reality, there were fewer Duterte supporters, but they were too noisy on social media, projecting strength in numbers.
Based on independent surveys, the number of Filipinos supporting the president exceeded the number of Duterte’s followers.
About 30 percent of those asked in the poll supported Marcos while Duterte’s support shrank to less than 20 percent. He used to have 80 to 90 percent support when he was in power.
Some political scientists and university professors attributed Duterte’s support level to fear.
During his six years in office, tens of thousands of people, mostly poor drug users and street-level peddlers, were killed in his signature “war on drugs” policy.
The people were afraid to go against Duterte’s war on drugs policy and supported his genocidal campaign, fearing they would be likely targets if they voiced opposition and challenged his policy.
A recent survey done by the Social Weather Stations (SWS) showed only 25 percent of the respondents supported Duterte’s war on drugs and opposed moves to hold him accountable for the thousands of deaths.
The same survey also showed 51 percent wanted him held accountable.
Where are the 51 percent? They were not heard on social media platforms. Only 25 percent were noisy, aided by Duterte’s allies, and amplified by troll farms and bots.
Only a few noisy Duterte people were behind social media posts. Machines and troll farms with identical messages, including the punctuations, make up the majority.
The government had its troll operations. However, the government’s efforts were ineffective.
Their efforts were drowned by the pro-Duterte propaganda. They were easily drowned by disinformation which was more relatable to ordinary people.
Thus, Filipinos should avoid social media platforms for information. They will be more vulnerable to propaganda, misinformation, disinformation, false and manipulated videos, photos, and texts.
There’s a bigger problem than the spread and proliferation of disinformation. “Fake news” is not the proper term because there’s no such thing as “fake” news. It is simply fabricated lies and deliberate disinformation.
News is verifiable information based on facts. It’s evidence-based, well-researched, vetted by editors, and went through a process.
It’s different from unverified, unsubstantiated concoctions made by some social media users who do not follow ethical standards imposed on journalists.
Some vloggers practice good journalism. They should be lauded for creating content based on well-researched data and facts.
Duterte was instrumental to maligning legacy media, attacking some local and international news agencies and organizations.
He considered legacy media and journalists as “state enemies.” He even shut down the country’s largest broadcast network and supported libel charges against an independent news portal, Rappler.
It is not a surprise that Duterte’s social media influencers also maligned legacy media, labeling journalists as biased, paid hacks, and purveyors of lies.
They were poisoning the minds of Filipinos, convincing social media users to stay away from legacy media and trust only vloggers.
The political noise created by pro-Duterte vloggers and the demonization of legacy media are a deadly combination that could threaten national security as these could lead to further polarization of the country.
Duterte will celebrate his 80th birthday by the end of the week, which could test the government on how it could handle the spread of disinformation that could foment violence.
0 Comments