Waning public interest
Many people perceive the proceedings as highly political, with outcomes influenced as much by existing political alliances as by the evidence presented.
Text size
Many people perceive the proceedings as highly political, with outcomes influenced as much by existing political alliances as by the evidence presented.
Public interest in the ongoing impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Duterte appears to be waning. Social media engagement and online discussions have slowed and become more limited. This stands in stark contrast to the impeachment proceedings against former Chief Justice Renato Corona, when much of the nation seemed practically glued to the unfolding events.
If one checks the live-streaming broadcasts, the trend may not be immediately obvious. Proceedings routinely draw tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of concurrent viewers on platforms such as YouTube and Facebook. Total viewership also regularly reaches the millions because dozens of media organizations simultaneously carry the proceedings.
In reality, however, those figures may not fully reflect sustained public engagement. Viewership metrics are typically measured through peak concurrent viewers, daily totals or cumulative video views, rather than the number of people who watch an entire proceeding from beginning to end.
Besides, even assuming those viewers stayed for the entire hearing, the audience would still represent only a small fraction of the country’s nearly 69 million registered voters. That suggests a large majority of voters are not following the proceedings closely.
There are a number of possible reasons why public interest appears to be declining. One is spectator fatigue brought about by what many perceive as delays in the conduct of the impeachment trial.
It also did not help that the House Committee on Justice devoted extensive public attention to the impeachment complaints before the articles were transmitted to the Senate. Critics have argued that the proceedings reflected political bias, procedural lapses and the presentation of evidence whose admissibility remains disputed.
During the impeachment proceedings against former President Joseph Estrada and former Chief Justice Corona, the House’s role was generally viewed as more limited, allowing the Senate trial to become the primary venue for the presentation of evidence. As a result, some of the issues and evidence now being presented have already received extensive public exposure, reducing the novelty of the trial for many viewers.
In addition, many people perceive the proceedings as highly political, with outcomes influenced as much by existing political alliances as by the evidence presented. At the same time, critics have pointed to the government’s handling of the flood control controversy, involving hundreds of billions of pesos, as another issue requiring equal attention.
For some observers, concentrating public attention primarily on Vice President Sara Duterte while other controversies remain unresolved contributes to perceptions of selective accountability. That may help explain why, despite sustained criticism from political opponents, she continues to post strong public approval ratings in various surveys.
For the administration, the political stakes remain high. If Vice President Duterte remains eligible to seek higher office, she could remain a formidable contender in the 2028 elections. Whether that becomes political reality, however, will ultimately depend on the outcome of the impeachment process and, ultimately, the judgment of the Filipino electorate.
