One of the enduring temptations of every administration, particularly one confronting declining public confidence, is to believe that unfavorable surveys can be explained away through more effective messaging or a more disciplined communications strategy.
Yet surveys — the credible ones, at least — are neither the disease nor the cause of public dissatisfaction; they are merely instruments that measure public sentiment. And when the numbers begin moving in the wrong direction, the wiser course is not to challenge the measurement but to examine the conditions that produced it.
The latest Social Weather Stations survey, which placed the Marcos administration in negative territory, should therefore be viewed less as a political inconvenience than as a reflection of frustrations that have been accumulating for years among ordinary Filipinos.
Many continue to struggle with rising prices, stagnant wages and an economy that, despite repeated assurances from government economic managers, has failed to deliver meaningful relief to their households.
The problem confronting President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. is not that Filipinos have suddenly become impatient. Rather, many of the promises that helped propel him to office have become benchmarks against which his administration is now being judged.
No campaign commitment illustrates this more vividly than the now-infamous pledge of P20-per-kilo rice, which was presented not merely as an aspiration but as a symbol of a future in which ordinary Filipinos would finally enjoy relief from the burdens of high food prices. Years later, that promise continues to be remembered precisely because so many voters feel that it remains unfulfilled.
Compounding these concerns are the allegations surrounding the multibillion-peso flood control projects. Whether the accusations eventually withstand scrutiny or collapse under investigation is, from a political standpoint, almost secondary to the larger issue of public perception.
Filipinos who continue to endure flooding after years of massive expenditures naturally begin to question whether public funds are being spent efficiently, and when allegations of kickbacks — including against Marcos himself — emerge in such an environment, skepticism becomes inevitable.
Yet it would be unfair to conclude that the entire government is underperforming. The Department of Human Settlements and Urban Development has seen public satisfaction rise as housing projects have expanded and begun addressing the needs of underserved communities.
The public’s favorable response demonstrates a simple truth often forgotten in politics: Tangible results speak more persuasively than carefully crafted narratives.
The same may be said of the Department of Migrant Workers and the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration, both of which have undertaken the difficult task of repatriating distressed overseas Filipino workers while providing assistance to help them rebuild their lives.
These agencies have demonstrated that government can still function effectively when resources are directed toward clearly defined objectives and programs are implemented with a sense of urgency.
Governments reveal their priorities not through speeches, slogans, or social media campaigns, but through the allocation of resources and the consistency with which they address the concerns of their citizens.
If public dissatisfaction is growing because inflation remains elevated, wages remain inadequate and corruption allegations continue to dominate the public discourse, then those concerns require solutions rather than explanations.
The lesson contained in the survey findings is neither complicated nor particularly ideological. Filipinos are not demanding more elaborate messaging from government; they are asking for tangible evidence that their daily lives are improving.
Until that happens, no amount of political optics can alter the growing belief that the promises made by Marcos have so far remained promises.