From Mocha to Krizette: What to do with irresponsible commentary?

It was difficult not to be transfixed, watching pro-Duterte social media personalities in the TriComm hearing respond to questions about things they have said, posted online, screencaps and all.

It was much like that meme called expectation vs reality. The expectation was for a grand display of arrogance, a show of force, from people whose voices and faces inundate political social media algorithms with their brand of incendiary commentary. This expectation is not unfounded: they had already shown a united front by ignoring the first invitations to attend this same inquiry, and they had seemed to quite enjoy the mainstream attention, including the support of people like veteran journalist Vergel Santos who believed, as Duterte social media personalities did, that the invitation in and by itself was a violation of the right to free speech.

The reality though was this: faced with screencaps of the things they’ve said recently on current issues, and questioned about the truth these opinions carry, they were cut down to size. There were raised voices, pleading and whining, and then calm, quiet engagement—and agreement—with the heightened elderly macho emotions of the dominantly male Committee. Apologies, forced and otherwise, were made; fear and harassment were invoked; vlogger tears fell.

A shift in status quo

For six years under Duterte none of his social media propagandists needed to answer for their posts, no matter how angry or inflammatory, no matter how malicious, no matter how libelous. None of them had to answer for the information they were using as basis for their commentary. That they were on the side of government of course was their leverage: why would any government official, why would any government agency, demand that they do better, call them out on wrong information, when they were basically doing this in service of the President?

Duterte himself, after all, lived off exaggeration and hyperbole to sustain his audience. Part of his performance as nation’s father was about a constant anger against all those he deemed as enemies of nation: addicts, activists, the Lumad, media, critics, the Pope, Obama, all. This display of antagonism his followers loved, his political allies echoed, and his propagandists on social media replicated. Anyone who called this kind of rhetoric out was attacked, harassed, or bullied online. If Duterte was their father, then these fruits didn’t fall far from the tree.

Read the rest on Vera Files.