What is the truth is the operative question in the time of disinformation. So says the opposition and its media allies which do not practice the most basic tenet of journalism which is objectivity. Without objectivity, there is no truth. This seems more apropos as compared to Maria Ressa’s version where fact is substituted for objectivity. It leads to another question, does the truth become fact or is a fact, the truth?
History is written by the victors but the historical revisionism of the opposition began in 1983 with the assassination of Ninoy Aquino. The grand stage was set with Ninoy being the martyr who experienced catharsis while under detention at Fort Bonifacio and Fort Magsaysay. There was no mention of his being as traditional as any politican was in the 50’s through the 60’s who utilized guns, goons and gold every election cycle.
The opposite was the focus on what Marcos did and did not do as President. The mosquito press, as it was then called, fed the public the information or disinformation it wanted consumed. The Catholic Churches throughout the country served as the distribution points every Sunday where there would be the bevy of publications being handed out after every Mass. This reached its peak during the campaign for the 1986 snap election.
Boo Chanco in his Philstar column writes:
In today’s times, shit is king. In a 2018 interview, Trump adviser Steve Bannon said the way to deal with social media is “to flood the zone with shit.” He was describing the “firehose of falsehood” tactic pioneered by Russian disinformation programs to keep Americans confused, disoriented, and angry.
What happens next? Jonathan Haidt, a social scientist who wrote a recent extensive Atlantic article, observed that even American democracy is now operating outside the bounds of sustainability.
“If we do not make major changes soon, then our institutions, our political system, and our society may collapse during the next major war, pandemic, financial meltdown or constitutional crisis.”
Alternative fact was a concept another Trump adviser coined after Trump’s press secretary was caught lying. We of the older generation think something is either a fact or a falsehood. Alternative facts don’t exist.
But times have changed. We are now supposedly living in a post-truth society. Objective facts are a thing of the past. In a post-fact society, facts are viewed as irrelevant. Emotional appeals are used to influence public opinion. Never mind the truth, never mind the facts.
The Washington Post reports that our political process is a victim of “coordinated keyboard warriors who spread disinformation, prop up political clients or smear their opponents, historical whitewashing is finding new homes” in the Philippines.
Political propaganda “is now proliferating on platforms like TikTok and YouTube that appeal primarily to Gen Z, ushering in a new era of fun, hip, glossily edited content that is harder to regulate online.”
“In the global war on the truth, the Philippines is especially vulnerable,” the Post observed, because of our large online population who find it difficult to spot fake news.
“President Rodrigo Duterte rose to power in 2016 aided by a keyboard army and online hate campaigns, forever changing the online landscape,” the Post. explained.
Indeed, the Philippines became a “petri dish” to test the use of Big Data analytics to predict and influence voters in an election, according to Christopher Wylie, a former employee turned whistleblower of the notorious Cambridge Analytica, a now defunct British political consulting company.
The company specialized in using data science methodologies to support political campaigns. It harvested the data of millions of Facebook users to target them for political campaigns in over 30 countries, including ours, to influence political decisions. Trump was one of their clients
Brittany Kaiser, a former Cambridge Analytica director turned whistleblower, warned about microtargeting or the practice of manipulating an individual’s thoughts and sentiments through disinformation tactics and the use of available personal data.
She said a politician who may want to “rebrand” or erase a current reputation can benefit from the expert use of online data. “Call it historical revisionism, that’s exactly what it is, but it’s done in a data-driven and scientific way…
“You undertake just enough research to figure out what people believe about a certain family, individual, politician, and then you figure out what could convince them to feel otherwise. The goal would be to keep running tests until you actually start to see people’s opinions and attitudes changing.”
Unfortunately, no one really noticed when an alternative universe was being built initially on Facebook and Twitter, and later on TikTok and YouTube that was changing our historical narratives to win over the generations that had no experience of our past.
Credit the family for understanding the dynamics of the new game, which was expressed by the Queen in The Kingmaker: “Perception is real, truth is not.” And that’s how this election is being won, riding on surveys and a nonstop feeding of, as Steve Bannon puts it, a lot of shit on TikTok.
Still, there are millions of Filipinos who are not ready to surrender this election just because surveys say they have no hope of winning. They went analog, held large rallies, and did house-to-house campaigning. They are also trying to catch up on TikTok.
It is convenient to lay the blame on Cambridge Analytica but Chanco forgets that before this there was already Rappler in the Philippines. Maria Ressa set up shop in 2012 and debuted what was then touted as the social news network. Rappler even had a mood meter, which asked readers how they felt after reading a particular news article. This was big data analytics at work. Given Rappler’s backers, it was clear that it was an experiment in gauging real-time public reaction or sentiment about major issues.
Rappler backed then President Aquino’s drive to rid the government of political enemies. It went to work during the Corona Impeachment Trial but social media was then in its infancy. The heavy lifting was still done by mainstream media. Public opinion was turned against Corona and even if the evidence was not strong enough, the public’s judgment was Corona deserved to be ousted as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.
It is convenient to blame the Marcos’ and their alleged attempt or execution of their strategy for rebranding and historical revisionism. The truth of the matter is the Roxas-Robredo campaign again missed the boat in 2016. They were overconfident because they had the government machinery at their disposal. Leave it to Nic Gabunada to focus on the niche of OFWs, who by that time, turned Facebook and Messenger as a platform for keeping in touch with their families and friends back home. Duterte’s disadvantage in terms of media coverage was made up for by the support he got from social media. Thus began the scramble to get online and go digital.
In truth and in fact, it was Rappler which used Philippine society as a petri dish for big data analytics, no doubt under instructions from its patrons such as the Open Society Foundation, the Omidyar Network and the National Endowment for Democracy.
While Rappler does not appeal to the D and E demographic, it has cultivated ties with the elite liberal-leftists among the political and civil society power blocs. This is very evident in the role it has taken after the ABS-CBN shutdown and it functioning as the enforcer of fact-checking in both the mainstream and social media platforms.
The backers of Maria Ressa have gone to the point of her being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize as a form of shock and awe. We Filipinos should have been thunderstruck but the effect has been the opposite. Filipinos are more wary of Rappler as a propagandist than as a news outlet because it has become the opposition’s mouthpiece.
The easy access to information has left the public confused not solely because of the overload but more because they are not assiduous in doing the research on the background of issues. This is further impacted by their short attention spans and lack of interest in reading long articles. They would rather listen and watch. This is why most of them are glued YouTube and TikTok. These are generations which have been spoon-fed and are used to instant gratification. What is worst is they are bereft of critical analysis and thinking.
Believe it or not, this is true for both sides and throughout the economic and demographic classes.
What did Imelda mean with her now famous statement “perception is real and the truth is not?”
My interpretation is she was referring to individual perceptions of what the truth is and not what the truth is per se. If you think about it, who actually defines the truth?
In the present environment, we have Rappler and other media outlets claiming they are the purveyors of truth. As Maria Ressa said “without facts, you can’t have the truth.” But this is based on her definition of the truth is.
Conversely, you have the other side claiming that their version of an issue is the truth. The producer of The Kingmaker, Lauren Greenfield, made a critical error by giving Imelda too much leeway in the documentary. The veteran politician that she is, she has a definitive feel for what the public wants. Hence her other quote “the poor always look for a star in the dark of the night.” Of course, she is that star.
What Greenfield did not see was how the former First Lady subtly delivered her message to the public; the projects I built when I was First Lady continues to benefit the public and there has been no improvement in the living conditions of the poor in Metro Manila. In fact, it has gone from bad to worst. This is true for the rest of the country and is what got Duterte elected President in 2016.
I do not think that Imeldific can relate with the claim of an alternative reality universe that is facilitated by technology but she definitely understands what Marshall McLuhan meant with “the medium is the message.”
That medium is now social media. This is where the battle for the hearts and minds is being fought. Perception is real and the truth is not. Social media is where perceptions of the truth are formed.
Then she became an even more reluctant candidate for vice president with almost zero national name recognition and won. She endured six years of nonstop demonizing by administration trolls, but still managed to make her office meaningful. Is an unseen hand preparing her for bigger things?
Chanco claims that Leni Robredo has been demonized by administration trolls. Really? Robredo brought this on herself with her non-stop criticism of the Duterte administration’s policies being the titular head of the opposition. There is nothing wrong with constructive criticism or even being a fiscalizer. But there is a difference between a fiscalizer and a destablizer. How many times has Robredo bad-mouthed not only the President but also Filipinos before the international community?
Robredo’s approval and trust ratings for the past five years is proof that she is not a victim because she embraced her role as the head of the opposition with gusto. If there is one reason why she will surely lose is because her Presidential run is focused primarily on preventing a Marcos return to Malacanan and not for the welfare of the country and the citizens.
This is the uncontested truth and disinformation and trolls have not played a role in convincing the greater majority of Filipinos that Robredo is not suited for the Presidency.
Comments