
How Duterte Turned Facebook into a Weapon, with Help from Facebook - anigbrowl
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-12-07/how-rodrigo-duterte-turned-facebook-into-a-weapon-with-a-little-help-from-facebook
======
bigbugbag
From what I gather of this article I should be siding with rappler but I can't
help but strongly dislike rappler for being part of facebook's effort to
destroy the internet with their internet.org thing.

I also have a hard time having sympathy for a news outlet that choose to live
inside facebook and then complains for having to deal with facebook's
shenanigans. You should know better than that and you kinda deserve what
happens to you when you choose to be subservient to a global master.

On the other hand this Duterte guy seems to be the usual violent dictator kind
and there is no way I can get behind that.

I guess it is a story of two evils, one involved in violence and death but
limited to a national local reach and the other empowering the first while
having deep global reach and influence on a third of the world population.

Reading this was informative and I've learned about something I was not aware
of but this leaves me in an incomfortable place where I feel powerless to help
and unhappy to choose the 'right' side.

I wish we could get rid of facebook, this thing is epitome of everything wrong
in our western world.

~~~
hux_
The news orgs have discovered placing 10th grade problem sets on the desks of
2nd graders is very lucrative.

It's what the Rush Limbaugh and Jon Oliver types do day in day out (and if you
are observant with zero long term impact). All the news orgs are doing it too
and they will never regain the trust they once had. Journalism was never about
making people feel helpless. Today's journalism is about making people feel
helpless for profit.

So my advice don't read stuff that's above your grade level.

~~~
defo_nonconvex
How does Oliver encourage helplessness? There's often a direct call-to-action
at the end of particularly pointed segments, from contacting local
representatives to the more frivolous hashtags for e.g. Phillip Morris. While
I have issues with his style, the targets are usually well chosen.

With regards to your analogy...you would not have much luck encouraging a 2nd
grader to improve their reading comprehension beyond 2nd grade by telling them
to stick to a 2nd grade level of reading.

~~~
creaghpatr
Oliver’s segments often climax with the host desperately sputtering “its 2016
for Christ sakes!!!” His whole brand is pessimistic cynicism.

~~~
nindalf
The person you replied to gave 2 specific examples of Oliver making calls to
action. If you're going to refute that point, you need to provide examples as
well, not just vague assertions. Remember, the meat of Oliver's show is the
15-20 minute segment that is well researched, credits sources and contains a
call to action at the end. The most famous example is probably Oliver's video
about Net Neutrality 2 years ago galvanised support for it and is used even
today to explain NN to laymen. Its absurd to claim that the show promotes
cynicism when Oliver always exhorts his viewers to do _something_.

If you're objecting to a "its 2016!" at the end of a throwaway 30-second joke
then you're being too sensitive IMO.

------
vatotemking
Lets not stray away from the main topic. Eg. Duterte is Hitler, etc. Those
deserve their own thread. Its basically this:

The founder of Rappler, was a former head of ABS-CBN news, a TV station
aligned with the liberal party, the party who lost to Duterte.

Rappler, as an online media outlet, and itself a propaganda machine, is
threatened by Facebook. That is why we have this article.

Basically, in HN speak, Facebook is disrupting the propaganda machine market
and Rappler is scared to go out of business.

~~~
thebokehwokeh2
Never thought I'd ever say this on a hacker news comment, but this comment is
pure, unadulterated BS.

Rappler, as a news organization, is head and shoulders above 90% of most other
news outlets in the region when it comes to factual reporting.

Your comment is effectively the Philippine version of Fox News binging,
functionally brainwashed, that say that the New York Times is fake news.

~~~
vatotemking
> Rappler, as a news organization, is head and shoulders above 90% of most
> other news outlets in the region when it comes to factual reporting.

Citation needed. Or you are just pulling stats out of pure, unadulterated BS.

Every form of media is a propaganda machine. Its why China spends a great
amount of money and effort for the Great Firewall. Its why advertising is an
industry.

The bigger question here is Facebook, and its power to influence the people on
a huge scale.

------
jcasman
Online communities need active human management and engagement. You can't
automate yourself out of this, Facebook. It seems like this pattern is
repeated over and over. Slashdot figured out a way to have human cultivation
aided by software. And the result was high quality. Digg came along and tried
to go all software, and it failed. Ignoring these lessons, many, many
newspapers open up their articles to unfettered commenting and are shocked
when anonymous users with no sense of accountability produce ugly comments.

~~~
scott_karana
It only works for Slashdot because it's a very homogenous audience.

~~~
erikb
Slashdot is still used? I thought HN is the replacement of what Slashdot once
was.

------
danra
Facebook sometimes does good, sometimes does bad, depending on how its
algorithms are tweaked. And it’s likely the algorithms are mostly tweaked to
maximize profit.

Currently, the only way to get the company to focus its efforts on truthful
news and protection from abuse is through regulation, which happily it looks
like the EU has started doing.

But the deeper issue is Facebook being a for-profit, closed-data-garden,
global social media behemoth who strangles competition aggressively. As a
result, there are few other social media sources to get the truth from, and
there is no real competitive pressure on Facebook to make it care enough about
protecting its users from abuse.

~~~
wereHamster
Why does the truth have to come from social media sources? Did people suddenly
forget about old-school journalism? Newspapers, publicly-funded radio and TV
programmes etc. Those are far better sources of 'truth' than you'll ever get
through social media.

~~~
jister
In the Philippines, the old school journalism that you are referring is dead.
Most journalists here can be bought and this is a fact. We use social media to
get information from government agencies pages without the "spin" included.

~~~
wereHamster
The "spin" is included in the reports given out by those gov agencies ;) It's
a pretty neat way for the government to manipulate its people.

~~~
jister
In the west that might be the case, check and balance for journalists. Our
previous administration used to do that as well. Duterte doesn't want to spin
information. If you're in doubt you can request something from their Freedom
of Information website.

~~~
girvo
I truly hope you’re paid for this, and not a true believer.

~~~
659087
Would accepting money to defend a mass murderer really be any better though?

~~~
jister
Mass murderer? You have no idea what you're talking about.

~~~
anigbrowl
He certainly aspires to be. Here he is, unedited, expressing his desire to
slaughter 3 million drug addicts:
[https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2016/sep/30/philippi...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2016/sep/30/philippines-
president-rodrigo-duterte-likens-himself-to-hitler-video)

~~~
justin66
His government has murdered thousands of people. If that's not mass murder...

[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/07/world/asia/ro...](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/07/world/asia/rodrigo-
duterte-philippines-drugs-killings.html)

~~~
jister
Yep a website full of spin. It's a joke.

~~~
justin66
What's the argument here? Those people didn't really die? Or do you have an
alternate explanation for who killed them, something the NY Times isn't
telling us the truth about because of their _secret liberal agenda_ that
extends to the Philippines for some obscure reason?

------
rini17
Facebook can be toxic even without any govt involvement. In Czech republic FB
death threats are widespread and virtually unchecked.
[https://news.vice.com/story/lawmakers-cant-keep-up-with-
all-...](https://news.vice.com/story/lawmakers-cant-keep-up-with-all-the-
facebook-death-threats-in-czech-republic)
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15885779](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15885779)

------
eswat
Reminded me of CBC’s piece on Duterte from earlier this year (many of the
people in the Bloomberg article are represented here). Most of the comments on
the video are critical of Leila de Lima, the CBC and the reporter.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVckX_-
MYng](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVckX_-MYng)

------
LeeHwang
Isn't time for facebook to be regulated by the government ? This is just
unbelievable.

~~~
anomie31
Which government? The Philippine government?

------
mjohnre
The other way to see it is that traditional media may be losing the monopoly
of information because people now have internet and social media as
alternative.

It concerns me because it seems that Maria Ressa is now turning to foreigners
to intervene and destabilize my country?

What if some of these "journalists" are the ones spreading fake news?

Recently, Rappler reported this. [https://www.rappler.com/nation/171702-isis-
resorts-world-man...](https://www.rappler.com/nation/171702-isis-resorts-
world-manila-casino-attack)

Then she followed up with this article. [https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/in-
depth/171784-terrorism-...](https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/in-
depth/171784-terrorism-isis-resorts-world-attack)

But the blogger RJ Nieto AKA Thinking Pinoy
([http://www.thinkingpinoy.net/](http://www.thinkingpinoy.net/)) pointed it
out as fearmongering and fake news.

"Rappler cited Agence France Press who cited Rita Katz of SITE Intelligence
Group who cited an anonymous "Marawi Contact". THAT IS DOUBLE HEARSAY (OR EVEN
TRIPLE HEARSAY). You did not even bother to ask Katz herself and instead
relied on a news wire!"
[https://web.facebook.com/TheThinkingPinoy/photos/a.568177789...](https://web.facebook.com/TheThinkingPinoy/photos/a.568177789995995.1073741828.567419693405138/844956232318148/?type=3&theater)

Thinking Pinoy is labeled by her as a troll and seems to be going around the
world trying to convince other people.
[http://www.getrealphilippines.com/blog/2017/06/people-
shriek...](http://www.getrealphilippines.com/blog/2017/06/people-shrieking-
fake-news-starting-sound-like-boy-cried-wolf/)

Here, Thinking Pinoy shows that bloggers are having more engagement in
Facebook than traditional media. That may be one of the reasons why she's
trying to put down Thinking Pinoy.
[https://web.facebook.com/TheThinkingPinoy/posts/681350205345...](https://web.facebook.com/TheThinkingPinoy/posts/681350205345419:0?_rdc=1&_rdr)

Is Pres. Duterte a tyrant or dictator? One may say that it depends on who is
affected and why.

Previous administration promised Freedom of Information (FOI) but only Pres.
Duterte implemented it. [http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/798612/full-text-
executive-orde...](http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/798612/full-text-executive-
order-on-freedom-of-information)

Here's the FOI online portal (Browse over 2662 requests and 217 government
agencies).
[https://www.foi.gov.ph/requests?agency=&status=SUCCESSFUL](https://www.foi.gov.ph/requests?agency=&status=SUCCESSFUL)

When I saw this online and fully functional, I was glad and convinced that he
is the opposite. He is a leader that upholds freedom and embraces technology
(this is very important to me because I'm in the tech sector).

He promised to try to uphold peace and order to the people during the
campaign. He openly told the people what he's going to do and it's his
priority. People voted for him and he won. Well, that's democracy at work.
[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/01/philippines-
pr...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/01/philippines-president-
rodrigo-duterte-urges-people-to-kill-drug-addicts)

He tries to make peace with the communists and muslim insurgents. He even let
one of the leaders of our muslim brothers speak on the president's podium.
[http://www.mindanews.com/peace-process/2016/11/nur-and-
digon...](http://www.mindanews.com/peace-process/2016/11/nur-and-digong-when-
brothers-and-presidents-meet/)

According to a survey, majority of the people "agreed they can say anything
they want openly and without fear even if it is against the government.
[http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2017/07/02/1715565/freedom...](http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2017/07/02/1715565/freedom-
speech-strong-sws)

He let protesters rally on the streets. Now, isn't that a working democracy
where people are free voice out their concerns?
[http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/848056/duterte-to-protesters-
yo...](http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/848056/duterte-to-protesters-you-can-
protest-with-no-limit)

How about some of the anti-Duterte who label other people as trolls and try to
silence them by taking down their Facebook account, what do you call them?

I was just scrolling here for tech news but then I found this which prompted
me to write this. Sorry for the long read. I'd like to know what you think
about this. Just refrain from senseless bashing please. By the way, I live in
the PH since birth.

~~~
skytreader
> You did not even bother to ask Katz herself and instead relied on a news
> wire!

Uh. Because the press relies on news wires all the time? While standard
practice, I am not claiming that news wires are infallible. Mistakes can
happen. But the difference between traditional journalists and Facebook
bloggers is that traditional journalists are held to a standard in factual
reporting. You might notice that the first Rappler article you linked to [1]
is subheaded by an update which conveys a message different to the headline:

(6th UPDATE) The Philippine National Police says the 'isolated' incident is
not a terrorist act but Defense Chief Lorenzana tells Rappler, "We're not
ruling out that this is ISIS."

In contrast, bloggers (like RJ Nieto in the Senate hearing regarding fake
news) would often just hide behind the excuse "I am entitled to my opinion".
Sure, no one contests that you are entitled to your own opinion. But never
peddle your opinion as fact.

> Previous administration promised Freedom of Information (FOI) but only Pres.
> Duterte implemented it.

I don't think this wins points for Duterte. The FOI came relatively late into
the last administration's term. The previous administration basically did the
bulk of the legislative footwork necessary to pass a bill. Almost all that's
left for Duterte to do is to sign the bill.

Had the FOI been raised a few legislative seasons earlier, it might as well be
Aquino who signed it into implementation. Carry over projects are common when
administrations transition.

> Here's the FOI online portal (Browse over 2662 requests and 217 government
> agencies).

I think a better measure of FOI's efficacy are the actual statistics. [2] The
graph isn't completely clear but it would seem that, as of this writing, there
are 797 denied requests (278 labeled as "Denied requests" and 519 merely
labeled "Denied"). Compared to 820 successful requests, that means it is
roughly 50-50 on whether your FOI request will be granted. So much for
"freedom" there.

Granted, some of the denied requests were unfulfilled allegedly since the
office from which the data was requested did not have said data. While a
believable response, I find it frustrating that our government could not
cross-check with other agencies when reasonable. But that is as much freedom
as you can get from bureaucracy, I guess.

[1] [https://www.rappler.com/nation/171702-isis-resorts-world-
man...](https://www.rappler.com/nation/171702-isis-resorts-world-manila-
casino-attack) [2]
[https://www.foi.gov.ph/statistics?type=outcomes](https://www.foi.gov.ph/statistics?type=outcomes)

~~~
mjohnre
> (6th UPDATE)

Initially, they reported without verification that ISIS was responsible. Isn't
that fearmongering? Does that not qualify as fake news?

> traditional journalists are held to a standard in factual reporting

Who checks them? They're not infallible just like the bloggers. Don't get me
wrong, I'm for free speech and not for censorship. What seems to be happening
now is that "journalists" label bloggers in Facebook as trolls to silence them
and still label Pres. Duterte as dictator. Who's the dictator in that case?

> bloggers (like RJ Nieto in the Senate hearing regarding fake news) would
> often just hide behind the excuse "I am entitled to my opinion"

The same RJ Nieto who is one of the people to be the first to raise the issue
about Dengvaxia, an unproven vaccine against Dengue administered by the
previous administration to about 700,000 children. Dengvaxia is reported to
worsen the condition for those who do not have a previous case of Dengue. I
think RJ Nieto peddles his opinion quite well to make people accountable. Why
do "journalists" label him as troll? Is it because he does not conform to
their narrative?

> The previous administration basically did the bulk of the legislative
> footwork necessary to pass a bill. Almost all that's left for Duterte to do
> is to sign the bill.

Pres. Duterte issued an executive order. Please don't try to frame it as if he
is credit grabbing. Even so, why didn't the previous administration just
signed and implemented it? By making it as a priority when Pres. Duterte took
office, I think he deserves a kudos.

> But that is as much freedom as you can get from bureaucracy, I guess.

Yeah, the government must improve.

~~~
skytreader
> Initially, they reported without verification that ISIS was responsible.

Because that's what came from the news wire, which as I pointed out is
standard practice for professional journalists. News wires work under the
assumption that the origin of the story (AFP in this case), have verified the
story themselves. In case a mistake happens (as it sometimes does, as it
seemingly did here), reporting outlets issue erratum.

> Who checks them? They're not infallible just like the bloggers.

You can check them yourself. One of the hallmarks of proper journalism is
citing your references and, in cases where your references request anonymity,
publish _other_ references which would either corroborate or rebut your other
reference. It is this nuance that makes journalism "professional", a trait
which these bloggers sorely lack: Mocha Uson, when asked whether she even
tried _at least once_ to ask for an account from the other side (Bam Aquino in
this case) invokes her right to "self-discrimi...err...incrimination". Oldest
way to cop-out in the book.

> ...and still label Pres. Duterte as dictator. Who's the dictator in that
> case?

Assuming without conceding that traditional media is wrong in labeling these
bloggers as trolls, the difference between them and Duterte is that Duterte is
in a position of power to actively act against these journalists. On the other
hand, all journalism can do is make their case (in a _professional_ manner)
and let the public/other offices of government decide. By themselves, they
cannot act against bloggers, let alone the government.

> The same RJ Nieto who is one of the people to be the first to raise the
> issue about Dengvaxia...

As you can tell, I don't waste my time following Nieto. Aware as I am on the
issue of Dengvaxia, I'd withhold judgement on whether Nieto did this in a
proper and professional manner.

However, assuming without conceding that this act from Nieto is praiseworthy,
this does not change the fact that in most other instances, Nieto fails in
basic journalistic rigor, bordering if not crossing over to acts of trolling.
Examples: [1] [2]

> I think RJ Nieto peddles his opinion quite well to make people accountable.

Again, you _do not_ peddle opinion to hold people accountable; you hold them
accountable with cold, hard, verifiable __facts __. How can you demand
accountability based on opinions from people which, as you yourself concedes,
are not infallible? Double whammy there.

> Please don't try to frame it as if he is credit grabbing.

I'm not saying Duterte is credit grabbing but that people are giving him more
credit than he is due. There's a difference there.

> Even so, why didn't the previous administration just signed and implemented
> it?

Because even in legislation, there's a due process that must be followed and
the previous administration followed it. Even if for a bill like FOI which I
fully support, I will be critical of Aquino had he dubiously manipulated the
legislative process just so he could claim the FOI under his belt.

[1]
[http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2017/10/04/1745517/blogger...](http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2017/10/04/1745517/blogger-
slammed-false-claims-vs-photojournalist)

[2] [http://www.mindanews.com/statements/2017/11/statement-
nujp-o...](http://www.mindanews.com/statements/2017/11/statement-nujp-on-
thinking-pinoys-threat-against-female-journalist/)

~~~
mjohnre
> In case a mistake happens (as it sometimes does, as it seemingly did here),
> reporting outlets issue erratum

That would seem that they reported fake news that could have caused panic but
later on just conveniently issued an erratum.

> You can check them yourself

So, it's a standard that "journalists" can disregard with impunity.

> Duterte is in a position of power to actively act against these journalists

But Pres. Duterte does not as this Bloomberg article clearly shows. Maria
Ressa still speaks freely and accuses him openly. That's one less reason to
label him as a dictator don't you think? I think I will commend him for that.
For upholding freedom of speech.

> Examples: [1] [2]

Regarding the live updates[1], He called it out because it may endanger the
soldiers. How should you call them out and get them in check instead?

Regarding the NUJP's condemnation[2], Nieto seems to be joking. Well, I
consider jokes and figure of speeches as gray areas in freedom of speech. I
don't have to defend him anyway. He can do that for himself.

> Again, you _do not_ peddle opinion to hold people accountable

I just playfully used your words peddle and opinion. Calm down :) That may
have made it vague. What I meant is that he effectively raises issues using
his words such as the Dengvaxia scandal. Now that it has gained awareness, we
may now expect accountability to those who administered it during the past and
the present administration. I hate it that the people responsible did it to
the children out of greed.

> I'm not saying Duterte is credit grabbing but that people are giving him
> more credit than he is due. There's a difference there.

Well, I'm giving Pres. Duterte credit because he delivered what the previous
administration did not. That's the big difference there.

> Because even in legislation, there's a due process that must be followed and
> the previous administration followed it. Even if for a bill like FOI which I
> fully support, I will be critical of Aquino had he dubiously manipulated the
> legislative process just so he could claim the FOI under his belt.

Maybe you should be critical of Aquino if you really fully support FOI.
Knowingly that legislative is slow, he should have at least issued an
executive order just as Pres. Duterte did. You just gave me another reason to
give Pres. Duterte credit because he found a way to do it quickly in his first
few months what the previous administration wasn't able to do after many years
in office. Maybe you should too ;)

[1]
[http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2017/10/04/1745517/blogger...](http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2017/10/04/1745517/blogger-
slammed-false-claims-vs-photojournalist) [2]
[http://www.mindanews.com/statements/2017/11/statement-
nujp-o...](http://www.mindanews.com/statements/2017/11/statement-nujp-on-
thinking-pinoys-threat-against-female-journalist/)

~~~
skytreader
> That would seem that they reported fake news that could have caused panic
> but later on just conveniently issued an erratum.

You are taking excerpts of my response out-of-context to argue your point.

Again, they had reason to believe it was true, because the information came
from a source they trust (AFP/the news wire). I would not call it "fake news"
if they admitted the case from the other side later on.

If you'd sneer at people admitting their own mistakes (like by issuing
errata)...well I hope you don't make mistakes of your own.

> So, it's a standard that "journalists" can disregard with impunity.

You are the only one saying that. If their reporting does not check out with
their references, they lose credibility at best or get sued for libel at
worst.

> But Pres. Duterte does not

I am not claiming that he is doing it. I am claiming that he _can_ do it. He
CAN dictate the police/influence regulating bodies to strangle institutions.
In contrast, these institutions do not have any similar influence. That is
why, unless you are using the word "dictator" in a context other than
political, you cannot label institutions as dictators.

> Regarding the live updates[1], He called it out because it may endanger the
> soldiers.

Now this, my friend, is a clear example of what you are calling "fake news
that could have caused panic". Quoting the article: "But Aznar stressed that
if Nieto's accusations of him endangering the troops were true, why is the
Armed Forces of the Philippines still allowing him to cover the Marawi siege?"
Surely, on-the-ground AFP units know better than Nieto on whether Aznar is
endangering them? And yet Nieto saw it fit to raise an online hue-and-cry.
Errata/apologies from Nieto: 0, nil, zilch, nada. Makes it hard to believe
that his intentions were for the best interest of the AFP (and in fact, had
that been the case, would it not make more sense to discreetly raise the
matter to AFP, seeing that he has contacts in the government the ordinary
Filipino does not?).

And also,

> Regarding the NUJP's condemnation[2], Nieto seems to be joking.

Imagine if a professional journalist made "jokes" in bad taste like that.
Imagine the professional backlash they would face. And yet Nieto who keeps
passing off his opinions as "fact" is not held to the same standard.

Point: any professional journalist who value their own credibility would be
careful not to say things like this, joking or not.

> What I meant is that he effectively raises issues using his words such as
> the Dengvaxia scandal.

Ends do not justify means. You originally raised Nieto's part in exposing
Dengvaxia in response to me labeling Nieto as "fake news". I stand by my
original assertion and that even if Nieto's role in exposing Dengvaxia is
significant, that does not redeem him from all the other times he peddled
baseless accusations or outright lies.

> he found a way to do it quickly in his first few months what the previous
> administration wasn't able to do after many years in office

Duterte would not have been able to implement it quickly were it not for the
legislative foundations (House meetings, Senate deliberations, etc.) that
happened in the previous administration. It is not as if all the work on this
bill was done exclusively by Duterte's administration. To claim that the
previous administration weren't able to do anything for FOI after many years
in office is outright false.

In fact, no amount of executive orders can will an ordinary bill into a strong
law in a matter of months. Should any president try, there are checks and
balances in the government (hi Supreme Court) that could question the process
and hold the implementation. Heck the RH Bill took its sweet time before it
even became a document awaiting a president's signature and it was still
issued a TRO for over a year. Not to mention that today, the RH Law is a
toothless version of what was originally passed.

------
RyanZAG
This is an extremely biased piece of journalism that almost anyone on the
ground in the Philippines would disagree with. Very dishonest and should not
be trusted at face value.

~~~
sago
For those of us on the other side of the world, Would you be willing to give a
quick summary of the biases you see in the piece, a taster of your experience
of the reality on the ground?

~~~
RyanZAG
The article makes it sound like it's fake accounts who are against some in the
media, but it's really the entire population.

The article calls out fake profile pictures on facebook as some indication of
an artificial message. This is wrong - many people on facebook use fake
profile pictures. I use a fake profile picture myself, although my account is
genuine. Probably a third of your facebook friend list uses fake profile
pictures - go check for yourself. The article also says they have collected a
database of facebook accounts that post pro-Duterte messages as if this is
somehow an indictment. With Duterte having an 80%+ approval rating across
100mil people population, many of whom have Facebook accounts, do you think a
database of 2mil posters is somehow unexpected or fake?

From my time in the Philippines, everyone on the street supports Duterte
because he's given them a sense of safety again. For many in western
countries, this kind of feeling is unknown because you've likely never walked
the streets expecting to be killed at any moment - you have working police and
institutions that keep you safe. For many years, the Philippines did not have
this, and they see Duterte as having helped make them safe. This breeds an
almost fanatical devotion for obvious reasons, and most Phillipinos on social
media will defend him with ferocity. The article tries to associate this as
something bad and fake. But it's not, it's real and genuine. You can open up
Twitter right now and go to Trump's feed and you will see people who hate him
and many who wish violence on him. That doesn't mean those people are fake -
and the people supporting Duterte aren't fake either.

Here's a quick video on how regular people in the Philippines feel about
articles like this one:
[https://youtu.be/siAjsu0ZmKE?t=429](https://youtu.be/siAjsu0ZmKE?t=429)

~~~
Lazare
The issue with fake accounts is they can help skew popular opinion. It's not a
defence to say "yeah, there's fake accounts, but popular opinion agrees with
them". All that means is they (might be) working.

> The article calls out fake profile pictures on facebook as some indication
> of an artificial message.

It did not; it called out fake profiles. Nowhere in the article did it suggest
that a fake profile picture was itself evidence of a fake profile.

> The article also says they have collected a database of facebook accounts
> that post pro-Duterte messages as if this is somehow an indictment.

It's a database of (mostly real) accounts that post messages that originate
with fake accounts; it's a way of measuring the scale of the problem. If
millions of real accounts echo these fake messages, it does't mean that there
isn't a problem, it means the problem is _really big_.

> For many in western countries, this kind of feeling is unknown because
> you've likely never walked the streets expecting to be killed at any moment
> - you have working police and institutions that keep you safe.

The homicide rate in the Philippines isn't that high; it's comparable to where
the US was 20 years ago. That's obviously not ideal, but there are countries
where when expecting death when you walk down the street is reasonable.
Honduras has a murder rate of 90 per 100k people; El Salvador is 70 per 100k
people. The Philippines is 9 per 100k.

> The article tries to associate this as something bad and fake. But it's not,
> it's real and genuine.

You're talking about a "sense of safety" and "feelings", and then discounting
claims of fake stories _as if those stories couldn 't possibly influence these
feelings_. Nobody is claiming that Duterte isn't popular; we're discussing
_why_ he's popular. Maybe he's popular because of stories spread by fake
Facebook accounts that made people feel safer, even though the fundamentals
haven't changed?

Plus, if you look at the _actual numbers_ , in Duterte's first year in office,
according the the Philippine National Police, murders actually increased by
22.75%.

> everyone on the street supports Duterte because he's given them a sense of
> safety again

You don't see any issues here?

~~~
RyanZAG
The article gives zero proof of any kind of fake accounts aside from fake
profile pictures, and calls Facebook out for not removing the accounts, even
thought Facebook says they have removed the fake ones. So clearly Facebook
does not feel that those particular accounts are fake either.

Calling someone you don't like a "fake account" (as someone has already hinted
about me in this very comment section!), does not suddenly turn it into a fake
account. It's a real account until you provide absolute proof - especially
when the supposed fake account has the same opinion as 80mil+ people in a
country. Sorry.

The rest of your argument hinges on the idea that 80mil people are terribly
stupid and can't tell fake accounts from real accounts - even though they live
in the country - and have fallen for a ruse. While you, in your great wisdom -
who has probably never been in the Philippines? - know them all to be fake
without any evidence. That's a fairly poor argument in my opinion.

~~~
LV-426
> Calling someone you don't like a "fake account" (as someone has already
> hinted about me in this very comment section!)

I don't know where someone hinted that you're a fake account, but you are
certainly disingenuously passing yourself off as some kind of authority on
what ordinary Filipinos think, when you don't even _live_ in the Philippines,
but a country thousands of miles away.

This explains why your only evidence of "the entire population" favouring
Duterte is a Youtube of people who like Duterte saying they like Duterte, and
what some people allegedly told you when you visited the country.

> even though they live in the country [...] who has probably never been in
> the Philippines?

And why are you even getting so worked up and fanatical about this? Because
you spent two weeks in Boracay? It's not your country - you live in South
Africa - so why are you acting otherwise?

~~~
RyanZAG
I spent a number of months there talking to people while doing remote work.
It's a great place to visit - highly recommend it to anyone!

As for why I'm posting: all it takes for evil to win is for good men to stay
silent.

~~~
foodislove
So a foreigner who talks to some people while doing remote work is presenting
himself as an authority on the views of people of said country. Well then,
I've visited Cancun on a number of occasions. I can say for a fact, that all
Mexicans drink Corona beer.

What is baffling is how someone who has no idea what they are talking about,
does nothing but make Trump like complaints about bias and how "everyone"
likes the dictator etc etc. Troll

------
jister
FYI, since 2016 a certain Liberal Party Senator and Maria Ressa wants total
control of social media and internet.

For those who have no idea about the Philippines and its politics. Rappler is
a George Soros funded media outfit and Maria Ressa is well known Aquino
(former president) or Liberal Party apologist. In the Philippines, Facebook,
not twitter, is the more popular medium people used to engage in social media
and politics and Rappler is losing the social media battle in Facebook that's
why Maria Ressa is so desparate to get the attention of foreign media. And,
from what I read Rappler is in trouble with funding.

The main reason why people are staying away from Rappler is becuase they spin
almost all of their news about Duterte and the present administration. Yes
there are fake news in Facebook but there are certainly a lot of fake news in
Rappler, really.

~~~
jinonoel
Bullshit. Fake news is different from bias. CNN is biased. Fox News is biased.
Rappler is biased. What they don't do is pass of fake information or rumors as
news, like saying " _since 2016 a certain Liberal Party Senator and Maria
Ressa wants total control of social media and internet._ " You're entitled to
your own opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts.

~~~
jister
You should watch the 2016 senate hearing

