Big and little histories coexist

Big history is about the bigwigs, who are few and identifiable, while little history is about the masses, who are many and nameless. At present, big Philippine history includes, among other things, the impeachment trial of Vice President Sara Z. Duterte in the Senate and the trial of former President Rodrigo R. Duterte in the International Criminal Court. Our little history is about how Filipinos are, as a whole, including what they feel about the bigwigs.

History has a past and is being made in the present; there is much speculation about what will be its future, especially in 2028. The scientific way to speculate on it, in my view, is to study all the data streaming along (“Surveys tell little history,” inquirer.net, 5/9/26).

Social Weather Stations (SWS) has a stream of quarterly public reports from its own-account surveys conducted in the last week of March, June, and September, and sometime before the December holidays. These reports give national aggregates and area breakdowns of surveys simultaneously fielded in the National Capital Region, Balance Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao. The latest field period was Sept. 21-27, 2026.

The most recent SWS media releases are: “Net satisfaction with President Ferdinand Marcos, Jr. falls to -11 in September 2026 from -7 in June 2026,” 10/8/26; “Self-Rated Poverty rises by 6% to 55%, while Self-Rated Food Poverty rises by 8% to 44%, between June and September 2026,” 10/13/26; “Hunger rises to 22.6% in September 2026 from 20.3% in June 2026,” 10/14/26; and “Net satisfaction rating for Vice-President Duterte at +21, Senate President Gatchalian at +4, Speaker Dy at -2, and Chief Justice Gesmundo at +6,” 10/15/25.

The print and broadcast media may announce the latest SWS national findings—which we appreciate—but will usually omit the area-details and other demographics. They rarely mention the interactions between the subject matters, for instance the latest relation of hunger to poverty. What the traditional media decide to report is up to them; they have space and time constraints to consider.

For serious scientific analysis, I recommend studying the new survey findings in the context of comparative points in past decades, let us say in the fourth year of the administrations of Duterte, Benigno Aquino III, Gloria Arroyo, Fidel Ramos, and Corazon Aquino (skipping Joseph Estrada, who didn’t reach three years in office). Contemporary SWS reports include tables and charts of the entire history of past results since the very beginning of the surveys. They are found at www.sws.org.ph and on the SWS Facebook page; one can also request SWS communications specialist Leo Laroza ([email protected]) to be put on the regular SWS mailing list.

Or, how about taking the context of the impeachment trials in the past? Or, how about the context of past bursts of consumer price inflation similar to that of the present?

Polling voter preferences for the 2028 election at the present time is arguably a partisan activity. In a democratic society, everyone has a right to partisanship. SWS, however, is NOT politically partisan. It takes pains NOT to be identified with any politician or party. For historical continuity, it will maintain its traditional satisfaction ratings for the five top officials (the President, Vice President, Senate President, Speaker of the House, and Chief Justice) regardless of the political leanings of the incumbents, and its performance ratings for the national administration, the senate, the House, and the Supreme Court. It will maintain its report card on public satisfaction with government performance on a list of subjects, though it may modify the list from time to time, for the sake of saliency.

But SWS avoids rating individual senators, congresspersons, or justices. It may resume its past practice of rating the cabinet as a whole, but has no need to rate individual cabinet members. Inclusion of item(s) concerning any person, institution, program, etc. in the SWS quarterly survey questionnaire has a market value; it is a quantifiable contribution, in kind, to the said person, etc.

Forecasting election outcomes is recognized, worldwide, as the litmus test of survey quality, which all survey-doers should pass. Once there is an official list of national candidates for the 2028 election, if SWS includes their names in a survey, it will not risk being accused of partisanship. (By the way, though I state here my understanding of SWS policy, my designation since 2021 as chair-emeritus literally means an honorary piece of furniture.)