Home Blog Page 28

Fake news, internet propaganda, and Philippine elections: 2016 to 2019

0

May 8, 2022, Gerardo Eusebio

A #FactsFirstPH study looks back at the use and spread of fake news and propaganda in the elections in 2016 and 2019

and propaganda in the elections in 2016 and 2019

“Fake News, Internet Propaganda, and Philippine elections: 2016 to 2019” is a study presented in a #FactsFirstPH research briefing held on May 04, 2022. The full copy of the research is reposted with permission from the authors.

This is part one of a two-part paper on fake news and internet propaganda in the last three elections, including the upcoming 2022 elections, which will be discussed in part two.

The 2016 Philippine general elections is said to be a watershed moment for social media and elections in the Philippines. The increased availability of social media led to its effective use by Rodrigo Duterte in his campaign for the presidency. His campaign highlighted how social media can be used in Philippine elections, and all the issues that entails. One of the more significant issues is the rise of internet trolls, fake news, and internet-based propaganda in Philippine elections, as supporters and campaigners began using social media as an electoral propaganda platform. This continued all the way to the 2019 legislative and local elections, having proven the potency of social media. 

But how have Filipino elections come to this? We would explore the history of fake news and internet propaganda in the 2016 and 2019 Philippine elections. How did it start? How prevalent fake news was back then? What were the most recurring themes? And how did these affect Philippine politics? 

A bit of Philippine social media history

The Philippines is currently considered the social media capital of the world by amount of use, where eighty million individuals use social media on average about four hours a day. Facebook is the predominant platform in the country, accounting for 93 percent of the country’s social media market share as of 2020.

This is the result of the Philippine telecommunications companies, such as Smart Mobile, availing the Free Basics service from Facebook in 2015, a service where data usage is made free to users through bundled prepaid and postpaid promos to the telecom companies. 

But social media and information technology have been with Filipinos much earlier, especially in their social and political lives. Text blasts were the leading method in organizing EDSA 2, the protest movement that ousted Erap Estrada from the Presidency. It is through social media where survivors of Typhoon Yolanda (Haiyan) not only indicated their survival to their family and friends, but also made their attempts to get over their experience by documenting and memorializing them. PDAF, or the Presidential Development Assistance Fund, was disestablished as the result of the August 2013 “Million People March” in Luneta Park. 

In terms of elections, social media has evolved from a peripheral yet potentially powerful area, to a major arena and tool for political propaganda. Rappler has documented such a rise leading to the 2019 elections. Although 2016 was the first election where social media became a major factor in elections, 2013 was the first election where a major case of social media’s effect on elections took place. Cynthia Villar’s “room nurse” comment that went viral over social media cost her a substantial portion of her potential voter support in the senatorial elections, though she still managed to retain her performance as top polling senator. 

Then, 2016 came, and Duterte’s campaign took advantage of social media, going as far as to get assistance from Facebook in optimizing their social media presence. They also utilized online volunteers and internet trolls to bolster support to Duterte and his slate and harass their opposition. Much of the reason for Duterte’s heavy reliance on social media in 2016 is practical: his campaign team did not have the resources that the major political parties had, maximizing their minute 10-million-peso media campaign budget through creative means. 

Of course, there have been countermeasures since then. Rappler has established the Fact Check section, where articles are published to rate the falsity of claims made on the internet, not just political ones. Facebook is also doing its part, an example being their efforts to take down Philippine-based pages and accounts that spread false news in the site.

Fake news in 2019

As a rudimentary measure of the prevalence of and major themes in fake news during and around the 2019 elections, we looked at Rappler’s Fact Check articles published between October 2018 and May 2019. The selected period covers the months from the filing of candidacy to the actual 2019 elections. To measure prevalence, interactions, or the sum of available likes, reactions, shares, retweets, views, and comments in each claim or article are used. For prevailing themes, keywords are considered. Note that what would be recorded would be data from the time of the publication of the Rappler articles.

Checking first on some preliminary statistics, we find 135 articles tackling specific claims in Rappler between October 2018 and May 2019. These articles rate claims from (ideally) true, to mixed, to false. Of these 135 claims, seventy-three are rated as false, forty are hoaxes, and nineteen are misleading claims. Facebook is by far the biggest source of recorded interactions, with 104 claims being posted in the social media site, while nine claims came from direct statements from interviews and other records. The articles have recorded a combined total of 4.36 million interactions from the claims. Assuming that these interactions are divided equally to likes/reactions, shares/retweets, and comments, and are done by the same people, this meant that there could be as much as 1.45 million people that has viewed fake news, giving us a preliminary estimate on how many people are vulnerable to fake news and internet propaganda. 

Moving now to the major themes or typology of these articles, we find that political claims form most claims studied and rated during the selected period, with eighty-two instances. It also has the greatest number of recorded interactions, with close to two million interactions recorded. This may not be surprising at all since much of these articles and even the claims themselves have arisen (or in some cases resurfaced) from the then-upcoming 2019 elections.

Looking at the specific themes or topics, the 2019 elections as a source of claims can be argued as both direct and indirect. Directly, the 2019 elections contributed to a sizable number of claims, at 10. Indirectly, the 2019 elections was supported with other top topics. For example, the presence of President Rodrigo Duterte as the top topic in the claims can be construed as support to his party and his chosen slate of candidates. Claims on Otso Diretso, Liberal Party’s senatorial slate for 2019, meanwhile, can be seen as, at the very least, arguments to their failure to capture seats in the Senate. 

To say that the 2019 elections is the major source for the rise of all the 135 claims attested by Rappler is a stretch, however. Looking at the top five claims by the number of interactions garnered, the selection is mixed, with the misleading claim regarding processing costs for land titles being the overall top article.

Zooming into the political claims, and it is still a bit mixed. Only one article of the top five, that of voter fraud via pre-shaded ballots, explicitly mentions the 2019 elections. The top story was about the lack of evidence on former President Ferdinand and former First Lady Imelda Marcos’ graft and corruption. The middle three, meanwhile, are focused on the achievements, both real and supposed, of President Duterte. 

Nonetheless, fake news and internet propaganda were then effective. A strong social media presence can help candidates boost their electoral performance, especially if said candidates have multiple supporter pages helping them spread all their messages and statements, including memes, viral content, and fake news. For example, out of the eighteen candidates for Senator running in the 2019 elections, all but three have official Facebook pages.

Conclusion

The 2016 and 2019 Philippine elections give us a look at how widespread fake news and internet propaganda is, and how much these could affect elections. Even in this cursory look, the fact that more than a million people can be argued to have been exposed to fake news just based on recorded interactions alone is quite telling.

A more complete data, which include followers and page views might paint a better yet different picture. But this can already be indicative of a virtual political environment that is vulnerable to malicious and deleterious propaganda.

Everyone, therefore, should be vigilant, especially that another national and local elections is forthcoming. One now wonders; however, how far fake news and internet propaganda has taken hold in this upcoming election. We shall see soon enough. – Rappler.com

Gerardo V. Eusebio has had extensive experience in public service, consultancy work and academia. He has served in both the legislative and executive branches of government. He is currently the head of political marketing at Warwick and Roger and Board Director of Lilac Center for Public Interest and continues to teach Political Science, Development and History at various Philippine universities since 1992.

According to Google, Leni Robredo Is Presidential Frontrunner

0

Google Trends have accurately predicted election outcomes in the United States, Canada, and the Philippines.

By Bryle B. Suralta, www.esquiremag.ph

While presidential candidate former Sen. Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos, Jr. is firmly in the lead in the latest Pulse Asia surveys, Google Trends is telling us a much different story.

The last Pulse Asia results held from April 16 to 21 saw Marcos, Jr. leading all bets with 56 percent, followed by Vice President Leonor “Leni” Robredo at only 24 percent. These numbers are quite similar to what we’ve seen from surveys in March. For their data sampling, Pulse Asia usually interviews 2,400 respondents who are registered voters. It also claims to maintain a ± 2% error margin at the 95% confidence level.

However, the latest Google Trends report says otherwise. Based on its latest search interest data compiled on May 1, Robredo leads all candidates at 55% with Marcos, Jr. trailing her at 24%. Manila City Mayor Francisco “Isko Moreno” Domagoso sits at third at roughly 10%.

Historically, Google Trends has been accurate in terms of predicting election results. It has successfully predicted every United States presidential outcome since 2004. This includes the highly polarizing 2016 US elections, when President Donald Trump took office. Similarly, it also predicted the wins of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in 2015, 2019, and 2021, as well as the victory of our very own President Rodrigo Duterte in 2016.

Google Trends has accurately foresaw election results in countries like Greece, Spain, France, Germany, and Brazil, as well.

Welcome to the Marcos campaign, where journalists are blocked and boxed out

0

May 5, 2022, Lian Buan

Vloggers and social media influencers occupy a special place in the Marcos campaign, as Ferdinand Marcos Jr chooses to run away from tough questions

MANILA, Philippines – “Where are you taking me?,” a flustered Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. asked the security of the Marriott Hotel in Pasay City, frustrated that the long walk to his holding room has opened him up to an ambush interview by reporters wanting to ask him questions.

It was in that ambush interview on March 1 where he said there was no need to stand for Ukraine. His team had to take that back two days later in an emailed statement to media.

Marcos runs a presidential campaign that hides from and even blocks professional journalists who cover him – whether they belong to local or international newsrooms. His camp gives preferential treatment to vloggers, influencers, and the Sonshine Media Network International that is operated by the followers of doomsday preacher Apollo Quiboloy, who owns the company and is wanted in the United States for alleged sex trafficking of children.

“Marcos Jr. avoids real journalists because they are expected to raise the real issues and pose the tough questions. He’s allergic to them because they run counter to his disinformation narrative, which is at the heart of his election campaign,” said Christian Esguerra, a veteran journalist who also teaches journalism at the University of Santo Tomas.

“So, he naturally finds comfort in the company of ‘friendly’ journalists and social media influencers because he gets to control that narrative,” said Esguerra.

Evade at all cost

In a Zoom press conference on January 17, Marcos’ spokesperson Vic Rodriguez assured the press that his candidate will “always answer everything and anything.”

Marcos made the same promise after he filed his certificate of candidacy (COC) at the Commission on Elections (Comelec) on October 6, 2021, the last time he faced – at length – independent media that he did not pre-select.

“I have never refused any interview on any basis whatsoever,” Marcos said in response to a question after filing his COC. “I don’t know where that’s coming from, when have I refused to answer questions about anything?,” he asked, visibly miffed, and then declined to answer a follow-up question on his mother’s graft conviction, saying “not here and now.”

Only days after Rodriguez said his candidate was willing to answer anything, Marcos snubbed the first major presidential interview by GMA News where Marcos called the host, Peabody-award winning journalist Jessica Soho, biased and “anti-Marcos.”

This set the tone for what would become the Marcos campaign’s media policy: evade at all cost.

Marcos skipped all presidential debates, including those organized by Comelec, and declined Vice President Leni Robredo’s last-minute challenge to a one-on-one debate. He attended one-on-ones with news anchors and journalists that his campaign staff would vet for him.

Vloggers rule

In the Marcos campaign, vloggers are the priority.

At the Philippine Arena for the campaign kickoff on February 8, only select vloggers were allowed unfettered access to the area, while reporters and their crew were put in a boxed area.

“There was a security guard or two guarding the gate of the actual area. Some reporters were sitting on the floor. I noticed as Marcos whizzed past us, he was surrounded by a phalanx of red-shirted men like a presidential detail, and they were clearly surrounding him in a circle, and he was protected,” said Howard Johnson, BBC’s Philippine correspondent.

“Later that night, Sara Duterte said we must protect Bongbong, so there was a sense of him being protected from something, but at that early stage [I asked] from what? Being protected from media, to stop anyone from a doorstep (ambush) interview,” said Johnson.

From the start, the Marcos team chose reporters whom it notified about its accreditation process. Were it not for some of those reporters forwarding to their colleagues the accreditation instruction, many would not be issued the Uniteam IDs – the pass to covering any of their rallies.

Many Filipino reporters of foreign agencies were not accredited. “With a week to go before the elections, his media-relations team still has not granted accreditation to news staffers from over a dozen news agencies under FOCAP and does not regularly respond to inquiries about coverage, requests for comment and permissions for use of materials,” said the Foreign Correspondents Association of the Philippines (FOCAP) in a statement Tuesday, May 3, World Press Freedom Day.

Some international news teams who flew in later in the campaign period failed to get any access at all.

The Marcos team likewise hid the schedules of campaign sorties, too. “Bulagaan na lang (you’ll just be surprised),” said one reporter assigned to cover the campaign. This made reporters more creative. The best technique, they found, was to search keywords on Facebook, for example “BBM Sara [insert date]” or “BBM-Sara [insert place.]” It also became a running joke that once reporters spotted many people in red, and vloggers would be seen with three phones on a rig, chances are they were were in the right place.

Even the Uniteam ID did not always guarantee access.

In Quezon City, the local organizers of mayoral candidate Mike Defensor allowed journalists to enter, but it was Marcos’ media officers who tried to block entry. It was in that Defensor-Uniteam rally on April 13 that Marcos’ media officer grabbed my wrists and covered my smartphone with her hands (I have a Uniteam ID). Minutes later, one of Marcos’ bulky male guards pinned me to a scaffolding just as I was in the middle of asking a question.

PSG securing Marcos?

Marcos’ security detail did not hesitate to physically block reporters from getting near him, with a reporter noting that they’re even more aggressive than the Presidential Security Group (PSG) detailed to vice presidential candidate Sara Duterte, who, as the President’s daughter, is entitled to PSG security.

In at least two campaign sorties which Marcos attended without Duterte, we got it on good authority that PSG members were deployed to secure Marcos, which is not allowed by PSG rules. A particular sortie in Paniqui, Tarlac, April 2, showed at least one PSG officer serving as a close-in security for Marcos. We were shown a photo of this officer, whom we have also identified, but we are not releasing it pending PSG’s response to our query.

Those swarming Marcos even dictate questions to reporters, according to another reporter, or they tell media what not to ask.

Rodriguez also had a habit of calling up reporters mainly to complain about the questions they asked. In the latter part of the campaign period, Rodriguez was no longer visible during sorties, so media had to settle for his statements posted on his Facebook page.

Another reporter observed: If you try to ask Marcos soft questions, like how he is, and what he thought of the area he just visited, his guards would relax. But the moment you shoot even mildly difficult questions such as if he was going to attend the debates, his guards will start roughing up.

It’s as if the questions are threats to Marcos’ life, quipped another.

Then again, reporters were gifted with crumbs once in a while.

Marcos agreed to an ambush interview during his Tagaytay sortie on March 22, but it was hush-hush. Several reporters had no clue. The Rappler team, after we learned of the venue, ran uphill to catch the candidate, as traffic was slow-moving. It was during that brief interview where Marcos laughed and walked away when he was asked if he or his family had paid their P203 billion estate tax.

Still, this didn’t stop journalists from trying.

BBC’s Johnson managed to ask Marcos at his Batangas rally on April 20: “Can you be a good president if you don’t answer serious questions?” His footage has, as of writing, been viewed 1.5 million times, and retweeted 26,000 times.

“If I came across as being aggressive, it wasn’t intended to be that way. In the end, the trolls changed the message to deflect, I believe, from the question I was asking,” said Johnson.

The common thread in the vicious attacks against Johnson after that incident was painting foreign media as threats to our sovereignty, which is straight out of the Duterte playbook.

One of the hate messages sent to Johnson was, “I just hope that someday, someone will slash your neck.”

If Marcos wins without facing the independent press, “legitimate journalists cannot be faulted for not trying,” said Esguerra.

“I would rather blame those who got the opportunity to sit down with him but didn’t raise the real issues both with vigor and rigor. Blame also media owners and newsroom managers who have been censoring their own journalists because they expect Marcos Jr. to win,” Esguerra added.

PSG securing Marcos?

Marcos’ security detail did not hesitate to physically block reporters from getting near him, with a reporter noting that they’re even more aggressive than the Presidential Security Group (PSG) detailed to vice presidential candidate Sara Duterte, who, as the President’s daughter, is entitled to PSG security.

In at least two campaign sorties which Marcos attended without Duterte, we got it on good authority that PSG members were deployed to secure Marcos, which is not allowed by PSG rules. A particular sortie in Paniqui, Tarlac, April 2, showed at least one PSG officer serving as a close-in security for Marcos. We were shown a photo of this officer, whom we have also identified, but we are not releasing it pending PSG’s response to our query.

Those swarming Marcos even dictate questions to reporters, according to another reporter, or they tell media what not to ask.

Rodriguez also had a habit of calling up reporters mainly to complain about the questions they asked. In the latter part of the campaign period, Rodriguez was no longer visible during sorties, so media had to settle for his statements posted on his Facebook page.

Another reporter observed: If you try to ask Marcos soft questions, like how he is, and what he thought of the area he just visited, his guards would relax. But the moment you shoot even mildly difficult questions such as if he was going to attend the debates, his guards will start roughing up.

It’s as if the questions are threats to Marcos’ life, quipped another.

Then again, reporters were gifted with crumbs once in a while.

Marcos agreed to an ambush interview during his Tagaytay sortie on March 22, but it was hush-hush. Several reporters had no clue. The Rappler team, after we learned of the venue, ran uphill to catch the candidate, as traffic was slow-moving. It was during that brief interview where Marcos laughed and walked away when he was asked if he or his family had paid their P203 billion estate tax.

Welcome to the Marcos campaign, where journalists are blocked and boxed out

Still, this didn’t stop journalists from trying.

BBC’s Johnson managed to ask Marcos at his Batangas rally on April 20: “Can you be a good president if you don’t answer serious questions?” His footage has, as of writing, been viewed 1.5 million times, and retweeted 26,000 times.

“If I came across as being aggressive, it wasn’t intended to be that way. In the end, the trolls changed the message to deflect, I believe, from the question I was asking,” said Johnson.

The common thread in the vicious attacks against Johnson after that incident was painting foreign media as threats to our sovereignty, which is straight out of the Duterte playbook.

One of the hate messages sent to Johnson was, “I just hope that someday, someone will slash your neck.”

If Marcos wins without facing the independent press, “legitimate journalists cannot be faulted for not trying,” said Esguerra.

“I would rather blame those who got the opportunity to sit down with him but didn’t raise the real issues both with vigor and rigor. Blame also media owners and newsroom managers who have been censoring their own journalists because they expect Marcos Jr. to win,” Esguerra added.

‘Show me one troll’

Reporters who were critical of Marcos and his campaign were subjected to online attacks, prompting FOCAP to release a statement out of “grave concern” that their members were being targeted by “supporters of Marcos. Johnson, himself trolled, said it was the same pattern of trolling he experienced for critically reporting on the Duterte government.

“It blasted for a week, ramped up very quickly. All of my social media accounts were flooded by comments, some of them threatening, death threats, lots of the same language repeated, which made it feel not very organic, like it’s coming from a script,” said Johnson.

This reporter was red-tagged in April, and there was a surge of Twitter comments coming from the same accounts after Rappler posted the footage of Marcos’ media officer and guard being rough on the journalist.

Esguerra said that his interviews with Marcos allies on his former show on the ABS-CBN News Channel, “were used to troll me on social media.”

But whenever he is asked, Marcos denies he has a troll farm, and always says, “show me one troll.”

Twitter had taken down a network of accounts spreading pro-Marcos content, and Filipino researchers have found that Marcos is the biggest beneficiary of fake news, including on TikTok.

“I’ve obviously been trolled on a massive scale, so it’s interesting for him to say he’s not aware of any trolling on his behalf, because it really does exist,” said Johnson.

Repeat a lie

Marcos has a tendency to keep repeating a lie. He has repeated in his vlogs that media does not cover him, which is downright false. He also insists that he earned a degree from Oxford University in England, when Oxford itself has clarified what he obtained was a mere special diploma that is not in any way equivalent to a degree.

The vloggers repeat the propaganda: they harp on Martial Law being the golden era, and lead discussions on why the Marcoses are not corrupt.

“He gets away with it, in large part, because of this massive disinformation infrastructure he has built around himself. Even if he evades real journalists, his vloggers can easily do damage control, mainly by gaslighting and attacking journalists,” said Esguerra.

In an interview with CNN Philippines, one of the very few he granted, Marcos claimed he was easily accessible to reporters, creating another inside joke that probably that was true if you were to ask him, “How are you?”

During the next rally after the CNN interview, in Pampanga on April 30, reporters managed to get backstage to put that claim to the test. But his media officers and guards tried so hard to keep him away from reporters they even took him to a tent for a few minutes, before making the run for his car.

This reporter managed to yell to him: “You said it is easy to interview you, we just have a few questions,” but he didn’t answer, much less look at who was asking.

TV5 reporter Marianne Enriquez got close and asked: If you are elected, what would you do to your P203 billion estate tax?

One of the people around Marcos told Enriquez: “Huwag niyo nang itanong ‘yung mga tanong na ganyan, ang sikip sikip na rito eh.” (Don’t ask questions like that, we’re already crowded here.)

The difference with father

Marcos’ father, the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos Sr., shut down media and took over their assets. He issued an order that dictated to media companies to report only positive news. Journalists were arrested, detained, fired from their jobs.

The context of his son’s presidential bid is different. “It’s no longer withholding of information, no longer censorship as it was during Marcos’ time when there were literally censors sitting in newsrooms and saying you cannot do this because it was a very controlled media environment,” said veteran journalist Sheila Coronel in an interview with GMA News’ Howie Severino Podcast.

“It’s no longer controlling the flow of information, but flooding the information space with so much disinformation and untruths and propaganda, so people are no longer able able to discern what is fact and what is not,” added Coronel, who covered the dictatorship and is the former academic dean of the Columbia Journalism School in New York.

But Marcos the son has his own way of controlling the media, like the press conference in Cagayan de Oro where questions were screened one day ahead, and only select reporters were invited.

The Marcos team dangled access to reporters, and would even go as far as removing reporters they dislike from their mailing list where they send their press releases.

One time, a reporter asked Marcos’ media officer why they were excluded from the mailing list, and the media officer merely said: “Be kind.”

FOCAP said that these “restrictive actions… have sparked fears of how independent media would be treated under another possible Marcos presidency.” – Rappler.com

A Dictator’s Son Rewrites History on TikTok in His Bid to Become the Philippines’ Next President

0

Chad de Guzman / Manila, May 5, 2022, Time

Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. has been able to leverage social media, especially TikTok, to rewrite the history of his father’s rule in the Philippines. He leads in in polls ahead of the May 9, 2022 presidential election by an unprecedented margin. Credit – TIME photo-illustration; Getty images

One of the most popular posts on Joey Toledo’s TikTok account is a 13-second clip of Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr.’s conversation with Juan Ponce Enrile. In the video, the 94-year-old Enrile—who served as justice secretary and defense minister under Marcos’ father, the Philippine dictator Ferdinand Marcos Sr.—claims that the Philippines was so safe under martial law imposed by the elder Marcos that a Filipino could leave his home unlocked, and “nobody would touch it.”

The video received 92,000 views, and while Toledo has some doubts about Enrile’s claims (“I’m not just sure if [Enrile’s] story is 100% percent accurate because he’s already old”), the 27-year-old says he believes Enrile “knows what happened during that time.”

The appeal of the video on TikTok, and many others like it, goes a long way to explaining why Bongbong Marcos looks likely to win the May 9 presidential election—potentially returning one of the Philippines’ most prominent dynasties to power more than 35 years after it was ousted following decades of dictatorship.

Almost all of the 32 pro-Marcos TikTok creators TIME contacted would not speak on the record. But one, Toledo from Nueva Ecija province, some 69 miles north of the capital Manila, agreed. Typical of many of his peers, he does not believe the well documented history of the Marcos family’s human rights abuses and corruption.

Working by day as an IT support desk staffer, Toledo has had his account for eight months but says he noticed a big uptick in followers when he began posting pro-Marcos videos. Toledo says he is not affiliated with the Marcos campaign, and is not paid for his content, but many of his posts to his 22,000 TikTok followers contain outright misinformation. One post, a repurposed video, suggests that the Marcos family’s vast wealth comes not from the looting of Philippine public coffers, but from earnings as a lawyer. Another video asserts that Marcos was “the best president in the world” during his time in office.

Taken together, they offer insight into how Bongbong Marcos has been able to leverage social media to rewrite the history of his father’s rule in the Philippines. The Marcos family amassed as much as $10 billion in ill-gotten wealth according to the World Bank and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. Under the dictator, 70,000 “enemies of the state” were arrested, 34,000 were tortured, and more than 3,000 killed, according to Amnesty International. But through countless TikTok videos, and other social media posts, a false picture of stability and economic growth has been created that leaves many Filipino voters pining for the “better years” of the Marcos regime.

Marcos leads by an unprecedented margin over other presidential contenders in pre-election surveys: Pulse Asia poll conducted in April showed him with a 33-point lead over his closest opponent—opposition candidate Vice President Leni Robredo.

Investigative reports from Philippine media outlets Rappler and VERA Files have shown that Marcos benefits from coordinated disinformation campaigns on social media platforms, especially through videos. Alan German, a campaign strategist at Philippine PR firm Agents International, tells TIME that some political content creators are paid as much as $4,700 on a monthly retainer basis—a small fortune in a country with a $170 monthly minimum wage. Bongbong Marcos, in an April 26 interview with CNN Philippines, has denied paying trolls to boost his image.

While misinformation is common to social media everywhere, in the Philippines it is especially pernicious. Facebook can be used data-free on smartphones, but access to the wider internet, including TikTok, costs money. Together with the country’s poor digital infrastructure, expensive cellular data and subpar media literacy, Filipinos often have difficulty accessing verified sources of information.

While Facebook remains the dominant social media platform in the Philippines, TikTok has quickly become a widely used source for sharing political news and views in the Southeast Asian nation of 110 million. The Chinese-owned social media company is privately held, so its user data is hard to verify, but a report from DataReportal, an independent data aggregator on digital trends worldwide, found up to 36 million Filipinos use the app. (The same data aggregator reports Facebook has as many as 84 million users in the Philippines.)

Toledo says it’s fun to make and share pro-Marcos content on the app—not least because he enjoys getting a rise out of supporters of Marcos’ rivals. “Sometimes it’s just to vex the other party so that they’ll have some engagement. You know how Filipinos are: they love clashes.”

His feckless approach to TikTok may explain why it works so well for him. Jonathan Corpus Ong, a disinformation researcher at Harvard University, says that compared to Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, TikTok’s algorithm can catapult a user to stardom with just one post in a couple of days. This encourages users like Toledo to create punchy content in bulk in the hopes of winning viral fame. “The potential of misinformative content to achieve a ‘viral sensation’ kind of dynamic is much higher in TikTok than in other platforms,” Ong says.

Kristoffer Rada, the public policy head of TikTok Philippines, says that once a video is flagged for disinformation, TikTok deprioritizes it.

Bongbong Marcos’ father, Ferdinand Marcos Sr., was president of the Philippines from 1965 to 1986. Many celebrate him for projects that survive to this day, including the Cultural Center of the Philippines and the country’s longest inter-island bridge. But his two-decade rule was also marred by massive human rights violations, corruption, and stealing from the national treasury. He was ousted in 1986 through a popular uprising, the People Power Revolution, and the Marcos family fled to Hawaii.

After returning from exile in 1991, the Marcos family began revising history in its favor, denying allegations of atrocities outright or remaining silent. Family members took up seats in the local government of their home province Ilocos Norte, successfully rehabilitating their image. (The dictator’s widow, Imelda, even ran for president in 1998 but eventually withdrew amid low public support.)

In recent years, the Marcos family has leveraged the power of social media to recraft the narrative even more. Political science professor Julio C. Teehankee at De La Salle University in Manila says that Bongbong and the rest of the Marcos family have adapted Marcos Sr.’s support networks and vast wealth to create a “well-oiled” and “well-financed” social media campaign.

Two other factors contribute to Bongbong Marcos’ popularity: Successive governments since the fall of the Marcos regime have failed to address basic social problems. More than one fifth of Filipinos live below the country’s poverty threshold, while the riches are concentrated among businessmen and political families. A 2018 report from a state-run think-tank estimated only around 1.4% of the population are high-income earners, estimated at $43,400 or more annually.

The other factor is the age of the electorate. Around 56% of the 65.7 million registered voters are under 40—meaning that they either weren’t born during the rule of Marcos Sr., or were too young to remember it. Teehankee says that social media, with its mandate to keep content short and succinct, flattens history—making it easier for myths and disinformation to take hold in the minds of young voters. “They do not have any experience or memory or knowledge about the Marcos regime,” he says, adding the Millennials and Gen Z appear to be driving much of the support for Bongbong Marcos on social media. Survey firm Pulse Asia also found that 72% of registered voters age 18-24 support Marcos.

Despite being a tumultuous era in Philippine history, Marcos’ dictatorship is barely discussed in schools or in textbooks. The result is that misinformation learned on social media tends to stick—even when supporters of Bongbong Marcos are confronted with fact-based rebuttals. “Let’s say [Ferdinand Marcos] really did steal money,” Toledo says. “There are a lot of projects built. Some of the money actually materialized.”

Toledo believes the fact of the Marcos dynasty’s ill-gotten wealth is a falsehood peddled by long-time political rivals the Aquino family. (After Marcos was ousted, Corazon, the wife of assassinated senator Benigno Aquino Jr., became president from 1986 to 1992 and their son, Benigno Aquino III, was president from 2010 until 2016.)

In truth, the Philippine Supreme Court ruled in July 2003 that the $658 million in deposits made by Ferdinand Marcos and his wife Imelda into Swiss bank accounts and foundations was unlawfully acquired. In 2018, Imelda was also convicted of graft related to private foundations she created for hiding unexplained wealth.

Fighting disinformation on TikTok

Some users are crusading against disinformation by creating their own videos that seek to fact-check the historical white-wash. Mona Magno-Veluz, a 55-year-old genealogist and a self-identified history enthusiast, began posting about Philippine historical figures and events in July 2021 to alleviate boredom during COVID-19 lockdowns. On the anniversary of Marcos’ declaration of Philippine martial law on Sept. 21, she posted a video dispelling the notion that the economy boomed during the dictatorship. She cited her sources, and explained the data in an external Google Docs link in her TikTok’s page bio. That video has since had 1.6 million views and over 156,000 likes.

While much of the response to her video was positive, Marcos loyalists attacked her in the comments section of her post. Magno-Veluz says many of them “weren’t interested in understanding the economics. They were just there because they felt outrage that I hinted that the martial law era was not our golden years.”

Already a college student when Marcos was ousted, Magno-Veluz says she was surprised by how passionate Marcos supporters are in asserting that their version of history is more accurate. She says her critics—most of whom were too young to remember the Marcos regime—make her feel like “being gaslighted by somebody who wasn’t there.”

TikTok says it has partnered with the Philippine commission on elections and local broadcast network GMA News in a bid to combat disinformation on the platform. Leading newswire agency Agence France-Presse also partnered with TikTok to fact-check content shared by Philippine users. TikTok notifies those who post misinformation and takes their accounts down. A spokesperson for TikTok tells TIME that it does not share how many videos or posts have been taken down.

More than 70% of Toledo’s posts on his political TikTok account now have disclaimers, which lead to the app’s landing site for the May 9 polls. The site contains information about voting, but doesn’t attempt to fact-check false claims. Toledo says he hasn’t received any warning from TikTok for promoting disinformation and adds that he is “sure” his posts “aren’t fake.”

He also says that he isn’t worried about the shutdown of his account. “The information will always be there. My account may disappear, but the information won’t.” For Philippine voters, that is precisely the problem.

—With reporting by Ella Hermonio / Manila

Surveys under scrutiny; Pulse Asia stands by method

0

By: Krixia Subingsubing – Reporter /Philippine Daily Inqruier /May 05, 2022

MANILA, Philippines — With only four days left until Election Day, some of the country’s top statisticians find themselves at loggerheads and pondering questions on whether survey designs need to be updated to more accurately reflect public sentiment in light of survey results that indicate a victory for Ferdinand Marcos Jr.

Statistics experts like Romulo Virola, former secretary-general of the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB), and Dr. Peter Cayton of the University of the Philippines, believe that the recent Pulse Asia surveys showing Marcos way ahead of his closest rival, Vice President Leni Robredo, had under- and overrepresented certain sectors.

Both believe that those in Classes A and B as well as the 18-41 age group were underrepresented, while there was an overrepresentation of those in Classes D and E. Virola also believes there was underrepresentation of those who reached college.

Cayton said that over- or underrepresentation meant that the “proportion of sample agents from a survey may be higher or lower than what is typically expected from a larger population.”

Virola clarified that he did not think Pulse Asia used a wrong sampling method, but that the over- and underrepresentation was the result of its post-stratification process, which focused on regional stratifications over sociodemographic group (SDG) profiles.

He noted that several studies and polls abroad have shown that age, class, and educational attainment have stronger impacts on voter preferences.

‘Flaws’

Virola tried to work out these “flaws” and reweighed the results of the March 16-21, 2022, Pulse Asia survey showing a 56-24 gap between Marcos and Robredo.

He did this by using the 2017 socioeconomic classification system (1SEC) developed by the UP School of Statistics (to adjust underrepresentation of the ABC classes); the distribution of educational attainment of the voting age population from the Philippine Statistics Authority (to adjust underrepresentation of those who reached college); and using the Comelec data on registered voters by age to adjust underrepresentation of the young voters.

Since the numbers barely moved from the March to the April 16-21, 2022, survey and Pulse Asia did not change its methodology from the first poll, “whatever the problem was from the very beginning was still there,” Virola told the Inquirer.

He admitted, however, that his computations were based on an “arbitrary” sharing of votes (60-40 in favor of Robredo) based on the assumption that there were relatively more Robredo supporters among the youth as well as those with higher educational and socioeconomic backgrounds.
Massive rallies

These assumptions, he said, were based partly on Google Trends data showing massive interest for Robredo. “Even though these are arbitrary metrics, I don’t think these are unreasonable given what is happening on the ground,” he said, referring to Robredo’s massive rallies.

His computations show that Marcos will still lead even after adjusting the nationwide count by socioeconomic class (53.7 percent versus 29.3 percent) and educational attainment (48.8 percent versus 31.2 percent).

However, adjusting the vote among those aged 18-41 and 42-57 shows Robredo taking over the lead narrowly with 40.4 percent to 39.6 percent.

Virola’s computations sought to augment the gaps in Pulse Asia’s sampling. But there are clashing opinions on whether over- or undersampling has significant implications on the research design.

Cayton said it could mean “some inherent deviation, at the very least.”

“If a group is under and overrepresented, the estimates tend to be a little more deviant in the way that it favors the overrepresented group than the underrepresented group,” he said. “If the deviation is very large, that might affect the outcomes in terms of whether it could be reliable and accurate.”

Cayton also tried to do ensemble methodologies that merged Pulse Asia survey and Google Trends data under the assumption that big data could also be a reliable metric of public sentiment.

His computations also bring Marcos and Robredo to a statistical tie. But he is also the first to admit that “there are a lot of heavy assumptions under this model.”

Men Sta. Ana, coordinator for the think tank Action for Economic Reforms, said the sampling used by Pulse Asia was “close to the true distribution,” especially since the demographic description of the respondents emerged only after conducting the random survey.

“Random variation is not a systematic bias. It just happens precisely because the result stems from randomness,” he said. A well-designed random survey “will result in a random variation that is insignificant,” he added.

Even without members from Classes A and B—who are notoriously difficult to interview and belong to the top 1 percent of households—in the mix, the variance would remain very small, Sta. Ana said.

Never compromised

Pulse Asia defended its methodology, which it had used for decades.

The margin of error for each SDG reflected the “variance for the SDG,” given its share of the total sample of the survey. It also corrected, “to a significant extent, what Dr. Virola finds as an under/oversampling of specific SDGs,” Pulse Asia president Ronald Holmes said in a statement.

He rejected claims that Pulse Asia had been “bought” and its work compromised. Creating such doubts on scientific polls “only deepen polarization and distrust and contribute to the continued erosion of an already extremely feeble democratic order,” Holmes said.

“Those who make these unfair and unjust criticisms bear the responsibility for their baseless accusations feeding into the spiral of disinformation and malinformation that affects our society,” he said.

Based on location

Research companies, like Pulse Asia, use multistage probability sampling based on location. Thus, the data on socioeconomic classes come after the survey when respondents are grouped into classes.

According to Jose Ramon Albert, a senior research fellow at the state-owned think tank Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS), it is impossible to sample households across socioeconomic and income groups as no one has a complete listing.

“Pulse Asia and SWS (Social Weather Stations) tables that list [socioeconomic status] are ‘afterthoughts’ from data collected in the survey, just as the tables on [PIDS] income groups. They are themselves data from the surveys,” Albert said.

Journalists need communities’ help in fighting disinformation

0

May 4, 2022, Sofia Guanzon

Philippine journalists have been facing intensified attacks on multiple fronts during this particular election season, says a press freedom study

MANILA, Philippines – Independent media in the Philippines has been combating various forms of attacks while also fighting disinformation online, that it needs a “societal response” to the scourge of lies.

Melinda Quintos de Jesus, executive director of the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR), made this recommendation in a forum on Tuesday, May 3 – World Press Freedom Day – as she gave an overview of the state of press freedom under the administration of President Rodrigo Duterte.

The forum – organized by the Freedom for Media, Freedom for All Network and the Wag Kukurap Coalition Eleksyon 2022 – highlighted the CMFR report on the experiences of Filipino journalists covering the 2022 elections.

Can media fight online disinformation while fending off those other attacks? De Jesus said: “It has to be a societal response. It cannot just be media because the power of the media draws out from the communities that it serves.” 

Moving targets 

The Philippines has consistently slipped further on the World Press Freedom Index, which assesses the state of media freedom globally. According to its 2022 report, the country ranked 147th out of 180 countries, lower than its 138th place in 2021. 

Throughout Duterte’s administration, libel laws were weaponized and verbal attacks were hurled at independent media. 

Most disturbingly, the country’s largest media network, ABS-CBN, had to shut down in 2020 after the House of Representatives, taking their cue from the President’s repeated threats to the network, voted to not renew the network’s franchise.

“Duterte’s hostility toward a critical press is a virus that has contaminated all organs of government,” De Jesus said

The CMFR report studied recorded incidents of harassment, threats, and killings of journalists from June 30, 2016, when Duterte assumed the presidency, to April 30, 2022. It was found that 23 journalists were killed during Duterte’s administration, across all mediums: 15 from radio, 6 from print, and 2 from online media organizations. 

Most of these killings were concentrated in Ilocos Region, Bicol, Central Visayas, Socckscargen, Western Mindanao, CARAGA, and Davao Region. 

“Journalists are moving targets of these forces because they exercise power of their own,” De Jesus said. 

The CMFR also recorded 258 incidents of threats and attacks against journalists were recorde, including cases of libel, intimidation, online platform attacks, physical harassment, and arrest. 

There was an increase in Distributed Denial-of-Service or DDoS attacks on news sites from November 30, 2021, to April 30, 2022. DDoS attacks are a form of cybercrime in which the attacker floods a server with artificial internet traffic to prevent legitimate users from accessing the sites.

In the same period, libel complaints were filed against 56 journalists. Journalists have been calling for the decriminalization of libel to prevent parties from using it to harass the media.

Election-related harassment 

While election and campaign season is a historically violent time in the country, journalists in particular have been facing challenges on multiple fronts.

De Jesus shared incidents of harassment that occurred during the current election season which involved presidential frontrunner Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. 

Marcos Jr. has been evasive with the press throughout his campaign, avoiding debates organized by major media organizations and the Commission on Elections (Comelec). 

On April 13, Rappler reporter Lian Buan was was shoved by Marcos’s male security personnel and media relations officers to prevent her from interviewing Marcos Jr. at a campaign rally in Quezon City. 

Other Rappler correspondents were also initially barred from covering a Marcos Jr. rally with his running mate Sara Duterte in Ilocos Sur last February 17.

Alongside incidents like these, journalists are being discredited while bloggers, influencers, and other social media personalities are free to spread unverified information. 

“Suddenly we’re in a situation wherein we have to explain and justify our reason for being. We’re plunging further and further into the depths of ridiculousness. Kailangan pa ipaliwanag kung bakit kailangan natin ng reporters (We have to explain why we even need reporters),” Christian Esguerra of Facts First said. 

Cong Corrales of the Mindanao Gold Star Daily shared a recent incident where their website collapsed due to over 60 million IP addresses trying to access it at the same time.

This is proven behavior indicative of a DDoS attack, which has become more frequent during the election season. 

Marcos Jr.’s ‘deliberate, well-funded’ disinformation machinery 

Following the changing role of social media as a primary source of information for news consumers, journalism has sought to adapt and simultaneously combat disinformation. 

“Trolls are endangering press freedom kasi marami nagse-censor ng kanilang sarili (because they cause journalists to censor themselves), and that is detrimental first to the public’s right to know and for them to make educated and intelligent choices,” Corrales said.

He cited how publications are being targeted by troll farms, which have been considered a key factor in Duterte’s victory in the 2016 elections. 

Regine Cabato, a Manila reporter for the The Washington Post’s Southeast Asian Bureau, most recently experienced these targeted attacks after investigating the Marcos family and covering Marcos Jr.’s campaign. 

“It is no secret within our industry that those who write about the Marcos family are more vulnerable to harassment than if you write about any other candidate,” Cabato said. “There has been data, there has been research that shows that there is a very deliberate and well-funded machinery that basically serves a certain family’s interest for this particular election.” (READ: Tracking the Marcos disinformation and propaganda machinery

In the Philippines, more than 120 organizations – from the media, the academe, and other advocacy groups – have formed the #FactsFirstPH coalition to fight disinformation. – Rappler.com

Fil-Ams ask Facebook to take down troll sites

0

By: Krixia Subingsubing – Reporter / Philippine Daily Inquirer / May 04, 2022

MANILA, Philippines — A group of Filipino-Americans who had uncovered a network of “trolls” attacking presidential aspirant Vice President Leni Robredo called on Meta’s founder Mark Zuckerberg to immediately take down these accounts and their posts, saying they pollute Philippine democracy.

In a report released on Tuesday, the US Filipinos for Good Governance (USFGG) launched TrollExposer.com, where they identified hundreds of Facebook accounts, pages and groups that consistently share fake news about Robredo and tagging her as a communist sympathizer.

The group launched the website in response to former Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s challenge to show him “where the trolls are,” as he denied hiring troll farms to prop up his candidacy and attack Robredo.

Using publicly available data and artificial intelligence, the group was able to trace 136 unique pieces of content (such as posts, pictures, videos) had been shared a cumulative 1,976 times across a network of 737 accounts and 77 pages.

Many of the contents come from the government’s own anti-insurgency task force and its spokesperson Lorraine Badoy, who continues to insist without basis that Robredo plans to form a coalition government with communist rebels.

The group found the top five accounts (profiles and pages) that pick up red-tagging content targeting the vice president and sharing it, followed by the number of times they have shared it:

1. Domingo Castillo – 202 times

2. Fernando Tolentino – 130 times

3. Federal Party, E Philippines – 53 times

4. Tfn Calce — 52 times

5. Francisco Esguerra — 40 times

Many of these accounts share their false content with a large number of Facebook pages for overseas Filipino workers and many nonpolitical sites.

These attacks appear coordinated and systematic, ramping up in the lead-up to the 2022 elections where Robredo currently trails behind the ousted dictator’s son and namesake in surveys, the group said.

“Our country has become extremely polarized through vigorous troll activity,” said Eric Lachica, USFGG Washington DC Coordinator. “Trolls have found fertile ground in weakly regulated social media to saturate the public with disinformation. These lies have been allowed to spread through Facebook for years.”

“Having the presidency decided based on lies that rewrite history and hide the fact that much of this troll activity is state-sponsored would be a tragedy,” he added. “We hope it is not too late to detoxify the minds and hearts of our people.”

The group called on Zuckerberg to clamp down on these networks and to act decisively against disinformation.

“That’s the reason we turned to Troll Exposer. The spread of harmful disinformation, manipulated narratives, and false propaganda needs to stop,” said Loida Lewis, USFGG national chair.

“We’re calling on Mark Zuckerberg and Meta/Facebook to immediately take down these fake posts and disable the trolls identified in TrollExposer.com to reduce the disinformation on his platform in the lead-up to the May 9th election,” she said.


As Philippine president, Marcos could control hunt for his family’s wealth

0

May 3, 2022, Reuters

A special report by Reuters says a victory by the son and namesake of the dictator represents an extraordinary resurrection for his family, coming 36 years after his father was toppled in a popular uprising and fled Manila by helicopter with the family

MANILA, Philippines – If Ferdinand Marcos Jr. triumphs in the upcoming Philippines presidential election, he will wield broad powers over government agencies seeking to recover as much as $10 billion plundered by his namesake father during his autocratic rule.

Marcos is on course to win the May 9 election, according to opinion polls. A survey taken in mid-April put him 33 percentage points ahead of his nearest rival, propelled by strategic political alliances and a well-funded campaign.

A victory for the 64-year-old Marcos, known in the Philippines as Bongbong, would represent an extraordinary resurrection for his family, coming 36 years after his father was toppled in a popular uprising and fled Manila by helicopter with the family.

Marcos and his family have often said that their vast fortune was legitimately obtained. On the campaign trail he has dismissed criticism about how the family obtained its wealth as “fake news.” Asked in an interview in January about the government’s efforts to recover the plundered assets, he said the family was “no longer involved in the cases,” adding that “what the court orders, we will follow.”

But a Reuters review of court filings, government documents and legal depositions by the presidential candidate, along with interviews with former investigators and lawyers, underscore the role Marcos has played in protecting the family’s wealth and thwarting efforts to retrieve it. Marcos and his family have defied court orders and appealed rulings requiring them to surrender assets. They are still defendants in at least 40 civil cases related to their wealth. In addition, Marcos’ 92-year-old mother, Imelda Marcos, is appealing her criminal conviction on seven separate graft charges in 2018, each of which carries a maximum prison sentence of 11 years.

As president, Marcos would hold sway over the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG), which is devoted to investigating and recovering the Marcos family’s wealth. The president has the authority to appoint the commissioners of the PCGG. A former commissioner told Reuters the president can also assign the agency tasks.

The president also appoints the Ombudsman, who oversees graft and corruption complaints against the government, as well as the head of the tax office. The Marcos family has for years refused to pay a tax bill that local media reports say now amounts to $3.9 billion, including penalties. Most recently, the Bureau of Internal Revenue sent a letter of demand in December to “the Marcos heirs” regarding the unpaid taxes.

Marcos has already intimated what he might do with these presidential powers. “You could say that the first time it was organized, it was really an anti-Marcos agency,” he told local DZRJ Radio in March, referring to the PCGG. “Nonetheless, we could turn it into a real anti-corruption agency.”

Marcos and his mother Imelda did not respond to questions for this story.

The PCGG, which was set up in 1986, has retrieved about $5 billion of the Marcos fortune, PCGG chairman John A. Agbayani told Reuters last week. But another $2.4 billion is still caught up in litigation, he said. Still more remains missing, former government investigators say. Citing US intelligence estimates, the first head of the PCGG, Jovito Salonga, said back in the 1980s that the family’s wealth “ranged from 5 to 10 billion dollars and even beyond that.”

Ruben Carranza, a former PCGG commissioner, believes that a Marcos victory will usher in a new phase in the 36-year battle to retrieve the family’s assets. Carranza told Reuters he is concerned Marcos will use the PCGG to ensure the family holds onto “whatever ill-gotten wealth they have kept.”

PCGG chief Agbayani said he believed whoever is elected president would “not interfere” in the litigation of pending court cases. “Even under a Bongbong Marcos presidency, I am confident that he will respect the rule of law, and the doctrine of Separation of Powers of the Executive and the Judiciary,” he said in a statement.

Agbayani said the powers of the PCGG should be expanded beyond its current focus on the Marcos family to include recovering “ill-gotten wealth of high government officials.”

Crates of cash

The hunt for the family’s riches began just hours after the Marcoses fled the Philippines as millions took to the streets in February 1986 amid widespread concerns Marcos Sr. had rigged the presidential election. The family went into exile in Hawaii.

They didn’t leave empty-handed, taking with them a stash of gold, jewelry worth $4 million and 22 crates of cash, according to US Customs, which seized the assets.

In their haste, the family left another cache of jewelry, artworks and designer clothes in the presidential palace and with associates. This included at least 1,200 pairs of shoes, part of Imelda Marcos’ huge collection of luxury footwear.

Crucially for investigators, the Marcoses left many documents in safes and filing cabinets at the palace.

The new government of Corazon Aquino, who replaced Marcos as president, set up the PCGG three days after the end of Marcos’ two-decade rule with its first executive order. Soon after, the agency announced it had obtained evidence of Swiss bank accounts controlled by Marcos Sr. and Imelda, kick-back schemes and monthly “donations” to the dictator from wealthy businessmen who had benefited from government policies.

The seized documents, as well as affidavits by a key financial adviser to the Marcoses and business associates, revealed a globe-spanning treasure: a network of bank deposits, trust accounts and foundations scattered around the world; a vast real estate portfolio, including four buildings in Manhattan; and a collection of more than 150 paintings, including works by masters such as Michelangelo, Van Gogh and Picasso, many of which are still missing.

The documents, affidavits and further investigations also revealed the family’s silent ownership of some of the largest companies run by business associates, popularly known in the Philippines as “cronies.” The World Bank said in a 2007 report the family’s “ill-gotten wealth” was also accumulated via the “raiding” of the national treasury and “skimming off foreign aid.”

“The greed was simply unparalleled, the plunder unmitigated, the pattern unbelievably remorseless,” the PCGG said in a 2016 submission to the Supreme Court in another case involving the family’s wealth. “All these in the face of the Filipino people’s continuing misery and suffering!”

Following the death of his father in 1989, Marcos became deeply enmeshed in litigation in the Philippines and United States as co-administrator of the estate. He said at the time he had little knowledge of the family’s wealth, including in two previously unreported depositions in 1991 and 1993 given under oath for a US court case, which Reuters reviewed. Asked in 1993 if his father involved him “at all” in the management of the family assets between 1980 and 1986, the last years of his presidency, Marcos replied: “I don’t know what the family assets are. No. I wasn’t involved in any of that.”

Marcos’ deposition was at odds with testimony he gave in 2007 in a case where the Philippines government was trying to seize assets connected to the family from billionaire Lucio Tan, whose sprawling conglomerate touched many facets of the economy.

Tan was one of the dictator’s close business associates and paid kickbacks to him, according to the PCGG. Asked in an article published in the Los Angeles Times in 1987 if documents showing he paid $11 million to Marcos Sr. were accurate, Tan answered, “Add one zero, maybe two.”

In a transcript of Marcos’ testimony in the 2007 case, reviewed by Reuters, he recalls being called into his father’s office before they were exiled to Hawaii in 1986 and shown “Shares of Stock” and property titles. “He at that point told me that he would like me to familiarize myself with the operations of some of the enterprises that we have interests in and that Mr. Lucio Tan was going to help me,” Marcos told the court.

During several meetings, Tan “laid out the ownership structure” of corporations the family had a stake in, Marcos said. According to the transcript, Marcos then reeled off some of the names of these businesses and described in detail how some of the companies were structured.

It was part of a larger effort to do an inventory “of all those business interests that we have,” Marcos told the court. “My sister Imee, who has legal training, was given the job of conducting the legal audit, and I was given the job to go to as many of these enterprises as I could.”

Tan and Imee Marcos did not respond to questions from Reuters.

During his father’s reign, Marcos studied at Oxford University in the 1970s, where he received a “special diploma” in social studies but didn’t complete a full degree, the university said. He also studied for an MBA at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania in the United States between 1979 and 1981, but did not complete the course, he said.

In 1991, two years after Marcos Sr. died, Imelda and her children were allowed to return to the Philippines. Imelda herself has since faced multiple criminal charges, while the family has been involved in scores of civil suits seeking to recover their riches.

Imelda, who lives in Manila, has only been convicted in the 2018 graft case. The court ruled that the case involved the transfer of more than $300 million of “ill-gotten wealth” to overseas bank accounts while she was Minister of Human Settlements, a position she held during her husband’s presidency. PCGG chairman Agbayani said Marcos had been acquitted in three earlier criminal cases and that there were other criminal cases still pending.

After returning, Imelda twice ran unsuccessfully for president and was elected to Congress for four terms. Her son has also spent most of his time in politics since returning, including two stints in the House of Representatives, interspersed with a terms governor of the family’s stronghold in the province of Ilocos Norte. Marcos also served as governor and vice governor of the province during his father’s rule. He was elected to the Senate in 2010 before unsuccessfully running for vice president in 2016, losing to Leni Robredo.

Robredo, a human rights lawyer, is now Marcos’ main rival in the presidential race and has targeted the family’s wealth during the campaign. “If the son benefits from the father’s sin, he is also guilty,” she said in February. “If you are benefiting from the very act for which your father was being judged, you should also be judged.”

The family negotiated two deals with the Philippines government in 1992 and 1993 that would have allowed them to keep part of their wealth, court records show. According to the later deal, they would have kept 25% of $356 million found in Swiss bank deposits. But the deals were never authorized by the presidents at the time and were declared null and void by the courts.

The courts have also repeatedly rejected the Marcos family’s assertion that their wealth was legitimately obtained.

Based on the tax filings of the dictator and his wife, the Philippines government has said that the Marcoses earned the equivalent of $304,372.43 in “known lawful income” during Ferdinand Marcos’ presidency. The Supreme Court accepted that calculation in a 2012 ruling that rejected a petition from Marcos and his mother to keep $40 million in a Merrill Lynch bank account claimed by the Philippines government. The assertion by Marcos and his mother that the late president’s legitimate income was far higher was “a sham and evidently calibrated to compound and confuse the issues,” the court said.

Mythical gold

In interviews over the decades, Marcos and his mother have referred to a huge haul of gold belonging to the dictator to explain their wealth. Marcos has said that his father built his wealth from trading in precious metals before he became president in 1965, according to Rappler, a local media outlet.

In interviews, Imelda Marcos has said her husband had six to seven tons of gold when he entered politics.

In a 2015 interview with local media, Marcos said his father discovered the so-called Yamashita treasure – a mythical cache of bullion supposedly left by Japanese troops retreating from the Philippines in 1945.

Asked about the gold in a March interview on the local One News channel, Marcos changed tack. “It does not exist,” he said.

Even so, the explanation of a gold haul underpinning the family wealth has gained currency on social media. One outlandish theory posits that the descendants of the Tallano dynasty that once ruled much of the Philippines gave Marcos Sr. and a Catholic priest a 30% share of 640,000 ton of gold that the pair helped them recover from the Vatican and return to the Philippines after World War Two. The theory has been promoted on social media by the political party originally founded by the dictator and which is now supporting Marcos Jr. The World Gold Council says only around 205,000 tons of gold has been mined throughout history.

The VERA Files, an independent Philippines fact-checking organization that has a contract with Facebook, said disinformation about Marcos and his family’s wealth surged last year. Several posts on Facebook and Youtube proclaimed that the family will give a large share of its wealth to the public if Marcos wins office. One of the main drivers of the social media traffic was a Facebook group called “Bongbong Marcos for Progress, Peace and Prosperity 2022,” according to the VERA Files.

In a statement, a spokesman for Facebook-owner Meta, Kevin McAlister, said the group had “repeatedly shared content that our fact-checking partners have debunked, which means it can’t monetize or advertise and we move all its posts lower in Feed so fewer people see them.” A warning label had been added to “several posts from this group,” he said.

Ruel Andayo, 44, a coconut seller in Manila, told Reuters he was voting for Marcos because of the “promise” that the family’s wealth would be shared with the people. Asked where he got the information, he replied: “Someone just said.”

“Bongbong’s wealth was not stolen. It was just an attempt by the yellows to ruin him,” Andayo added. He was referring to the yellow color associated with the “People Power” protesters who ousted Marcos in 1986.

On the campaign trail, Marcos has appeared at mass rallies with Sara Duterte-Carpio, the daughter of outgoing President Rodrigo Duterte and his running mate for vice president. At a rally in the city of Lipa south of Manila in April, the crowd was treated to fireworks and performances by local pop stars.

Marcos’ son, Ferdinand Alexander Marcos, popularly known as Sandro, is also playing a role. He is running for Congress and has featured heavily in the campaign, especially online, where his posts have drawn adoring responses from young women.

Political analysts say a decades-long public relations effort to alter perceptions about his father’s presidency, much of it disseminated via social media, has benefited Marcos. But key to his frontrunner status, they add, is his partnership with Duterte-Carpio.

Ronald Holmes, president of Pulse Asia, a Manila-based polling firm, told Reuters that Marcos’ support doubled after he partnered in November with Duterte-Carpio. The move garnered him mass support from the Duterte stronghold in the southern island of Mindanao and big cities like Cebu where he had previously languished. In the multi-ethnic Philippines, “many voters pick candidates on ethnic-linguistic lines,” Holmes said.

Never ‘repentant’

While Marcos has said the family is not a party to any ongoing court cases, PCGG chairman Agbayani told Reuters that in “all pending civil cases for recovery” of the wealth, Marcos and his sister Imee “substituted their deceased father as heirs in a representative capacity, pursuant to our rules of court.”

Antonio Carpio, a former Supreme Court justice, told Reuters the Marcos family has opposed “every move” of the Philippines government to recover its wealth, including lodging frequent appeals of court decisions.

“They have never been repentant,” said Carpio. “They have never acknowledged these (assets) are ill-gotten wealth.”

Marcos has been personally involved in some of the appeals. In January 2020, he filed a motion to the Supreme Court supporting the objection by his mother and his sister Irene to a ruling that rejected the family’s ownership of more than 150 artworks, including the missing masterpieces. The case, which is listed as still pending by the PCGG, has been litigated for 31 years.

Irene Marcos did not respond to questions from Reuters.

In the United States, the family has used similar tactics to thwart legal action against them. One such case involves a class action heard by the US District Court in Hawaii seeking redress for victims of martial law, a period that extended for almost half of Marcos Sr.’s presidency. During this time, some 70,000 people were imprisoned, 34,000 were tortured and over 3,200 were killed, according to Amnesty International.

The case was launched two months after the Marcos family went into exile in Hawaii. In 1995, the district court awarded almost $2 billion to 9,539 victims. The Marcoses lodged at least three unsuccessful appeals before a final contempt order and an additional $353 million penalty were imposed on Marcos and his mother by the court in 2011 – a ruling they also appealed.

Still, only about $37 million of the $2 billion award has been recovered from the sales proceeds of artworks and property owned by the family in the United States, said Philadelphia-based lawyer Robert Swift, who launched the class action.

Mila Sibayan, 63, is one of the plaintiffs. She was arrested in 1983 and detained for three years in a military base for helping lead a petition opposing a pulp mill owned by a golfing partner of the dictator. Sibayan says she was sexually molested by a soldier and held in painful stress positions during interrogations. In one instance, she was jammed into a metal drum with another woman and rolled around the military base.

Sibayan said her husband, who was an activist and also one of the plaintiffs, was beaten with a wooden plank and a rifle butt. He passed away in September.

Sibayan said she and her husband filed an affidavit about their detention, but no longer had a copy. They received a total of about P180,000 in 2010 and 2014 (about $3,400 today). At the time, they were a working couple with two children living on a combined income of $95 per month.

“You can never put a price on the kind of suffering we endured,” Sibayan said.

The president, who serves a single six-year term, also chooses the heads of other government bodies that could play a role in recovering the family’s wealth. The central bank governor, who is chosen by the president, doubles as the head of the country’s anti-money laundering council, according to the council’s website. The president also selects the head of the nation’s anti-corruption commission.

Marcos has questioned whether there were widespread human rights abuses during his father’s rule. As president, he would also appoint the chairman of the human rights commission.

When it comes to the judicial system, the president has extensive powers. As well as appointing prosecutors and the solicitor general, who represents the government in court, the president also appoints judges.

Agbayani said he believed the PCGG should complete its work on “the Marcos ill-gotten wealth” in seven years. “This means that all litigation is terminated by that time,” he said. “All recovered assets are sold/privatized by that time.”

Antonio La Vina, professor of law and politics at the Ateneo de Manila University, is concerned this won’t happen. If Marcos wins, he said, then prosecutors and the PCGG will not pursue the pending court cases involving the family’s wealth for his entire presidential term.

“For six years, cases will not move,” La Vina told Reuters, “so they will die a natural death.” – Rappler.com