“Celebrity” in Philippine politics can manifest in more ways than one. Most notoriously, celebrity makes itself evident when film and television stars participate in politics as candidates during election season. However, the increased role of new (or digital) media in our daily lives has also amplified the role of celebrity in our consumption of political content, ushering in an era of heightened access to news, alternative facts, and polarized sentiments. Celebrity status as social capital in news creation and dissemination should be scrutinized, particularly concerning the rise of pro-government political content creation and disinformation online.
The Good, the Bad, and the Sensational: Political News in the Philippines
Although the power of media to influence public opinion and facilitate state propaganda has long been a cause for concern, some argue its overstatement and the primacy of preexisting cognitive biases. Being consumption-driven, media entities would thus produce whatever piques their viewers’ interest the most. There is value in information that already resonates with an audience.
Consumer preference for the shocking and buzzworthy manifests in the extensive news coverage of celebrity and political scandals. Some notable examples in the last two decades are former president Joseph Estrada’s trial and resignation (himself being a celebrity politician), former president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s election fraud allegations (popularized as the Hello Garci scandal), and former chief justice Renato Corona’s highly televised impeachment trial. Leading up to the 2016 Philippine presidential elections, Rappler’s forum called #TheLeaderIWant provided then-candidate Rodrigo Duterte a platform to promote his campaign against drug-related crimes. Broadcasted on 200 television and radio stations and livestreamed online, the forum also gave many Filipinos their introduction to the candidate. The drug war rhetoric soon became a regrettable soundbite and the bombacious bad-mouthed, iron-fisted character a popular President and formidable enemy of the free press.
The Porosity of New Media and an Age of “Alternative Facts”
New media and mobile devices are necessities in a world of growing connectivity, easing the general public’s access to communication, information, and various forms of consumable content. At the start of 2024, internet penetration in the Philippines stood at 73.6%, with 86.98 million people in the country being internet users and 86.75 million being social media users. In the same way that the Internet has become highly pervasive in people’s daily affairs, its porosity also allows for the entry and influence of human interests – for better or worse.
In 2018, the world uncovered the role that big data played in the presidential campaign of Donald Trump two years prior. Political consultation firm Cambridge Analytica harvested raw data from 87 million Facebook users without consent, which was used for political persuasion through microtargeting, or sending messages specific to a person’s inclinations to have them think or vote in a certain way. Facebook addressed the issue through a statement laying down the measures it would take to further safeguard its users’ data and where these 87 million users were from. While the majority were from the United States, the second highest on the list was the Philippines with 1.4% or a little over one million users. Brittany Kaiser, a former employee of Cambridge Analytica turned whistleblower, claimed that Ferdinand Marcos Jr. sought the firm’s help to rebrand the Marcos family image. This was met with denial and a threat of libel charges that have yet to actualize.
Although survey results leading to the 2022 Philippine elections showed the clear likelihood of a second Marcos presidency, the means through which this would be achieved deserves a deeper probe. Covert political campaigning has since caught the attention of both journalists and scholars, especially how it is done through social media with the use of networked disinformation and malicious “trolls”, or political campaign actors (be these anonymous users or bots) that disrupt online interactions. While troll armies provide their patrons with a front of strong public support, notably during the Duterte administration, disinformation networks are instrumental in maintaining the support that already exists and propagating it through pro-government content online. Such content is created and delivered by social media nano- and micro-influencers (whose followings range from 1000 to 100,000) that utilize their niches to disinform, promote highly partisan views, and politicize traditionally non-political spaces.
Marcos’ succession from Duterte provided a steady continuity for this problem with the same daunting implications on the professional sphere of journalism. These include the heightened public distrust or at its worst, outright aggression against journalists and other media professionals, activists, and members of the academe. Perceived opponents or critics of the government experienced “red-tagging” or being branded as communist insurgents which often preluded attacks from pro-government entities that incited fear among victims. The trajectory is also troubling, given the persistence of micro-celebrities and vloggers in the field of political news creation and dissemination. Having contributed significantly to the campaign of Marcos Jr., pro-government vloggers had lobbied for accreditation to gain access to the Malacañang as media observers, an endeavor that failed due to infighting.
Avenue for Participation?
Widespread trolling and disinformation are indeed serious consequences of untethered new media use. However, these also demonstrate how digital content creation and communication can promote public participation in politics, as information is no longer gate-kept by big media entities. Citizen journalism, for example, can be an antithesis to the above-discussed predicament, where regular Filipinos partake in news-sharing while maintaining journalistic principles and ethics. ABS-CBN’s highly successful “Boto Mo, I-Patrol Mo” (Your Vote, You Patrol) and “Bayan Mo, I-Patrol Mo” (Your Town, You Patrol) initiatives demonstrate citizen empowerment by giving them a platform to report irregularities and help monitor their localities. Instead of exacerbating divides, productive online interactions can enrich political discourse by inviting diverse opinions. Nonetheless, checks are necessary to ensure “media freedom” is not equated with the freedom to spread false information and incite hostilities, given that “citizen journalists” are not bound by the same standards as media professionals.
Ultimately, this piece establishes that the situation in the Philippines is dire, especially with the election of its last two presidents being severely linked with covert campaigning, disinformation networks, and discrediting of professional journalism. However, it is imperative to assert that we are not a hopeless case and that some steps in the right direction can and have been made. Fact-checking, for example, presents the most potential in combatting rampant online disinformation. Nonetheless, it is not without its limits in terms of how people perceive and receive fact-checks. Efforts like partnerships with non-profits that support journalism, and media literacy programs, among many others, also show that the aspiration for a high-quality digital media landscape in the Philippines is alive.
*Photo by Sora Shimazaki, “Crop unrecognizable man using laptop in darkness” (Pexels), Creative Commons Zero license.
Hi, Martina! This is such a good read, especially in today’s context of the digital age where our society witnessed the significant increase in the role of media not just in our everyday lives but also in the area of politics.
Picking up from your discussion, it can be observed that the intersection of politics and media is somewhat of a double-edged sword. On the good side, it allows people to access information and participate in political discussions through social media, promoting the democratic practice of free speech. On the other hand, the hardly regulated sphere of the virtual world paves the way for fake news and disinformation to persist which leads to deception, manipulation, harassment, and other forms of abuse perpetuated by the people in power, aggravating the already eroding democracy of the country,
This is alarming especially since political strategies and propaganda reach the people very easily and unchecked. A lot more concerning is even with the existence of regulatory initiatives of companies behind social media networks and news organizations, some of which are fact-checking and media literacy campaigns, they are not enough to mitigate the issues of disinformation; rather, they cultivate a sense of public distrust, particularly towards the press. I appreciate the optimism in the end but the growing public distrust towards these institutions poses a big challenge for them and for us to advance actions that can provide proactive resolutions that do not blur the lines between freedom of speech and abuse of such. Without such mechanisms, this may lead to polarization and further erode the democracy in the country.
Overall, this is an insightful commentary on the role and implications of new media, alongside the emergence of micro-celebrities and fake news, on the democracy of the country.
Hello Martina! Props for choice of topic considering how the past election has seen the increased and diversified use of various forms of media for political and particularistic ends.
I liked how you raised the expanding concept of celebrity and new media. Although they are not mainstream, micro-celebrities who act as political mouthpieces amass clout. Although this clout may not initially appear impactful compared to those from big stars, the fact that it still reaches an audience is an indication that political disinformation networks on these new platforms are working. From here, the larger quantities/numbers of these micro-celebrities can arguably match or at least provide enough influence to inculcate dangerous partisan views as they would have with bigger celebrities, especially when wielded at the command of brazenly polarizing political figures such as Marcos-Duterte. I believe what you raised here should be the subject of more literature on social media and celebrity politics.
Despite this, I agree with you that new media platforms can still generate productive political participation. I liked that you raised various manifestations of this such as citizen journalism. After all, such participative politics is still an integral component of democracy. I just think that your piece (and us in general) should have pinpointed and called for the accountability and responsibility of the media platforms (e.g Facebook and TikTok) themselves to provide these checks. Crucial regulatory mechanisms must come from them, as fact-checking and media literacy alone cannot overcome anti-democratic online content.
In terms of writing mechanics, I believe some paragraphs could have been separated to facilitate better readability, though the organization of the piece as a whole is quite good.
Overall, I commend you for the insightful piece. It really does shed light on aspects of Philippine politics that need to be investigated further.
Hi, Martina!
Firstly, it was a good read. You chose a pertinent issue, especially since next year’s election is considered a glimpse of what the next Philippine administration would look like. I have noticed that the “trolls” have lessened since the last 2022 elections, but have moved into a different platform. There is a possibility that they have transformed themselves into these “influencers”. Second, I agree that micro-celebrities and those who label themselves as “influencers” have changed the game in the usual celebrity politics in the Philippines. They have become a powerful tool to overturn public opinion over an issue. A huge factor in the recent but continuously growing phenomena of micro-celebrities is the vilification of legitimate news sources by the Duterte regime. Partnered by a social media algorithm that lets you dwindle the rabbit hole after watching even one misleading vlog of said micro-celebrities, the public’s distrust worsens because news outlets are often also targeted by disinformation from these vlogs.
Lastly, although we should always be optimistic that we can power through all this disinformation for the sake of our nation, it is certainly hard to measure how successful fact-checking initiatives are. Ultimately, it should be a community effort. However, my observation is that the fact-checkers are outnumbered by those who purposefully spread lies on the internet. Again, the algorithm does not help. The solution to such a deeply ingrained problem should be systemic. It will be an uphill battle for a very long time. Let us hope that more people will join the fight against disinformation.
Hey Martina!
I would like to commend your writing, especially how extensive and comprehensive you are in explaining and discussing the arguments presented.
Well, your article provides a clear lens on the impact of Philippine politics on the media landscape. It gives a good understanding and explanation of the complex relationship and interconnectedness between celebrities, digital media, political disinformation, and the prevalence of micro-celebrities and even influencers in spreading disinformation using their platforms. The comprehensive and insightful analysis on underscoring and undermining media power often has a line in terms of the content of these celebrities for facts and fiction stories.
The stance is relevant, and it has a strong argument, especially in providing tactics and a hostile background on the dynamics and factors of civic and political participation with the media freedom that we have. I appreciate the various scenarios and examples for providing a good assumption on how we can monitor electoral integrity and engage with society. I am expecting counterarguments with the paper, especially in providing more detailed solutions on how we can foster digital media as it affects democratic engagement. Nonetheless, it’s a great op-ed with a comprehensive contribution to the ongoing conversation on digital disinformation and celebrity culture.
Well-written op-ed indeed!
Hi, Mx. Obligado!
Firstly, this was an insightful read! I particularly enjoyed the segment on the Porosity of New Media and an Age of Alternative Facts and how it elucidated the drawbacks of untethered media
freedom–mentioning the nonconsensual harvesting of data by political consulting firms and how
these were used to manipulate netizens to think a certain way. This article has also provided evidence of the rising role of media in public participation in politics–particularly focusing on the significance of political sensationalization of news outlets and the growing relevance of micro-celebrities. I am particularly reminded of celebrity politics, in which movie stars or teleseryes’ leading men with their popularity have provided a huge leverage in their pursuit of electoral posts; this, I believe, can be observed in the sudden rise of what you have termed as “micro-celebrities” and their influence on electoral choices.
Furthermore, this article has provided nuanced implications of media freedom and how this has enabled the use of covert political campaigning in social media through disinformation networks and troll farms. By tapping into the visceral implications of media freedom and providing context on how this is executed, this article provided a chilling effect that enticed me and made me want to read further on the issue.
Overall, this article was comprehensive, concise, and cohesive. The author did a great job of fitting the content within a blog post. Good job!