Duterte and fake news

Duterte and fake news | Daily Tribune

It was no less than former President Digong Duterte’s former spokesperson, Harry Roque, who once declared that “fake news,” or misinformation and disinformation, should belong in the “market of ideas” tied to free speech. This concept, rooted in free speech theory, claims the truth comes out when all kinds of ideas compete openly.

But misinformation and disinformation aren’t really ideas. They’re merely lies pretending to be facts. This is the central issue in the ongoing House of Representatives hearings, where pro-Duterte vloggers have been caught spreading false claims and have even admitted to doing so themselves.

The House probe highlighted clear cases of these falsehoods. One example: vlogger Krizette Chu recently claimed on her social media post that there was a “mass resignation” in the Philippine National Police and Armed Forces after Duterte’s arrest by the ICC.

Another case: Mark Anthony Lopez claimed Philippine forces used water cannons against Chinese ships in the West Philippine Sea, then took it back and apologized when he was asked for proof. A third instance: some vloggers said there were no victims of Duterte’s drug war, calling the reported deaths a “hoax.” Still another, over 107 fake X accounts under Chinese names were found to be spreading pro-Duterte lies about the West Philippine Sea, suggesting outside help.

This disinformation campaign shows how Duterte’s social media operations works. It does not play fair in the “market of ideas.”

The “market of ideas” assumes people can tell the truth from the lies. But in a flawed democracy like ours, the people aren’t players in the market. They are the product.

The Duterte team simply knows the statistics. In 2025, 83.8 percent (91 million) of Filipinos use the internet, and 60 percent get their news from Facebook. In a country where education is low, critical thinking and media literacy lag, especially among the urban poor and rural majority. Popularity, fueled by a celebrity-obsessed culture, drives voters’ choices where TikTok trends trump policy debates.

Many don’t have the skills to question what they hear, merely relying on celebrity and popular politicians. Loyalty eclipses the truth. In the age of social media, politicians and candidates don’t need substance if they’ve got clout.

Disinformation piggybacks on that. Disinformation operates outside the spirit of the marketplace by intentionally distorting reality, not to advance debate (as Harry Roque wants us to believe), but to deceive and manipulate.

Unlike honest errors or differing opinions, the examples above don’t seek to engage in good faith discussions. They want to simply drown out the truth with noise, knowing that the algorithms of Facebook and TikTok amplify sensational lies over plain facts and favor outrage over accuracy.

The House probe on fake news is timely. Disinformation, such as the false claims of vloggers like Chu, Lopez et al. pushing pro-Duterte propaganda, can seriously create political and economic instability in the country.

Politically, their lies erode trust in institutions like the government, military, and police, and sow confusion and division among Filipinos. Economically, this instability can scare off investors who demand a predictable environment. False narratives about security risks or governance failures signal chaos, potentially crashing markets and stalling growth, especially when we are aiming to hit 6-7 percent GDP growth this year.

We all know that Chu and Lopez are not independent rogue actors. They are cogs in the wheel of Duterte’s machinery that is working to reconquer the political landscape, no matter the cost.

Duterte and fake news are not random occurrences. Fake news is a deliberate strategy to steer politics Duterte’s way. The Dutertes and their social media crew aim to dominate not inform. They don’t mind if this leaves Filipinos unaware, misinformed and divided — as long as it keeps the Dutertes in power.