Social media power waning?

**media[16662]**THE VIEW FROM RIZAL“How much influence did social media have on the results of the recent elections in our country?”Some media practitioners and colleagues in the local government sector have been asking me this question since the conclusion of the electoral exercise last month. They wanted my view on what appears to be an emerging discussion: The ability of social media and so-called influencers to sway voters and influence their choice of who to vote for.This is a subject worth taking a deep look into. After all, as of 2023, there are already some 92.1 million social media users in the country, according to the Digital Philippines report. In the 2022 elections, the Comelec Digital Monitoring reported a total of 250-plus million election-related posts. In the polls of that year, the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism reported that a total of ₱786 million was spent by political aspirants on Facebook advertising.My view is that social media, in the recent elections, continued to facilitate interaction among voters, as well as candidates and the electorate. This is what this platform had done in the last two elections. Social media has been a major source of information. It is interesting, the proliferation of misinformation and disinformation in social media seems to have also hit the roof in the past election.In January this year, before the May polls, a group of bloggers and vloggers under the name “Sinaunang Panahon” published a well-researched article on the impact of social media in Philippine elections. According to the group, this platform “has revolutionized political communication in the Philippines and enabled direct engagement between candidates and voters.”The platform also encouraged “innovative campaign techniques” based on social media strategies. Thanks to social media, the group said “interactive content played a key role in shaping public opinion,” and made for significant “voter awareness and participation.”What the online article did not answer is this: “Was the use of social media crucial to the victory or loss of candidates vying for elective positions?”It appears this question has been fueled by the observation that there are powerful internet personalities who threw their hat in the political arena and ended up losing miserably in the elections. Some political candidates spent significant amounts of campaign funds on social media advertising and did not make it to the winning circle. Here are some of the emerging views following this kind of development. First, the number of followers does not necessarily translate into several votes. Second, it is possible that most of the so-called followers are mere “spectators.” They have no commitment to the “influencer” being followed. They have clicked the “follow” button simply to enjoy the novelty of social media posts. Social media followers are not “command votes” and an influencer’s page in social media is not a “political Baluarte.”Third, at the end of the day, “social media popularity” does not automatically convert voters. This view is supported by a study done by collaborative research done in 2019 by three professors from the University of Massachusetts, the Canberra University and the Australian National University. In the study titled “Tracking Digital Disinformation in the 2019 Philippine Midterm Elections,” the authors pointed out that “social media does not singularly determine electoral outcomes.” “Where social media makes a difference is their profound role in transforming the character of political conversations,” the study said, noting due to the presence of these platforms, “candidates now have opportunities to speak on a broader range of issues using vernaculars that reach out to communities in diverse platforms.” We agree. While social media provides an easy tool to reach voters, candidates will still have to woo them and win them over. Voters continue to demand performance and track record. More than ever, “proof” is more important than “popularity.”It appears this principle was confirmed in the experience of several social media personalities vying for local government posts maximized the availability of social media platforms. Reels, TikTok, Facebook and YouTube gave them the tool to rally public sentiment and arouse emotions against their election rivals. According to reports, a number of such aspirants failed miserably using this strategy to win, garnering only a token number of votes. This tells us that the number of “thinking voters” — those who cannot be swayed by hype and emotion — has significantly increased. In our column last week, we referred to them as the “free market vote.” They will do their own research and make their own decisions. They will use their own criteria. They are no one’s “command vote.” We believe social media will continue to be part of the democratic processes in our country.People will use it to get information and to monitor the environment. We doubt, however, if it can wield enough power to get the public to decide in favor of personalities favored by this platform. (The author is the mayor of Antipolo City, former Rizal governor, DENR assistant secretary and LLDA general manager. Email: antipolocitygov@gmail.com)