Shielding voters from disinformation agents
Less than three months before the May 12 midterm elections, the proliferation of pre-election surveys has been a cause of concern for the Commission on Elections (Comelec) and poll watchdog groups.
In general, surveys are helpful if they can accurately capture public opinion, providing us with an awareness of the pulse of the public on burning issues that confront voters and candidates alike—from hunger, joblessness, underemployment, to levels of popularity and satisfaction ratings among government officials and institutions.
Surveys, if conducted honestly, collect data that can help in crafting policies, guiding policymakers in their solemn duty to serve the common good. Surveys keep our officials on their toes and accountable to the people, which is where sovereignty ultimately resides.
Election surveys, in particular, ask for voter preference when choosing local or national candidates, although they can also measure the perceptions of voters toward a candidate’s popularity, qualifications, or political platforms.
But as snapshots of public opinion, surveys can only provide a time-bound gauge of how people view their local or national candidates. Unscrupulous polling firms can manipulate them by selecting a sample that is not representative of the target population or framing the questions incorrectly.
At worst, election surveys (which reward popularity) become a surrogate, however fleeting and incomplete, for the competence of certain candidates in the electoral race whenever there is a dearth of information about their backgrounds and accomplishments. For instance, since many people are rooting for this X candidate, then X must be good.
Weeding out “fakes.”
To remedy the situation, the Comelec en banc has adopted supplemental rules regarding the publication of survey results before the May 12 polls. Resolution No. 11117 calls for the registration of all survey firms with Comelec’s Political Finance and Affairs Department before they can publicly disseminate election survey results.
“Our message is very simple: all survey firms must register, at the same time [provide us] all with the information that we need, which the Supreme Court said we can ask them,” said Comelec chair George Erwin Garcia. He denied that the poll body had any intention to stifle freedom of speech or expression in issuing new regulations. (“Comelec sharpens rules on surveys, wary of ‘fakes,’” News, 2/21/25)
In 2001, the Supreme Court upheld the right to conduct election surveys as part of freedom of expression, which prevented the Comelec from implementing Section 5.4 of the Fair Elections Act.
The assailed section stated that “Surveys affecting national candidates shall not be published fifteen (15) days before an election and surveys affecting local candidates shall not be published seven (7) days before an election.”
But pundits, politicians, and social scientists have long wrestled over the question of how polls affect voters due to the bandwagon effect, which can lead to manipulation of public opinion. This may explain why some 50 percent of all democracies (Frankovic, 2018) ban the publication of pre-election surveys before an election. (“Tracking restrictions on the freedom to publish opinion polls,” Research World, 2018)
Influencing voters. It is undeniable that surveys are a tool for political campaigning, as they influence voters. In April 2015, the high court upheld Comelec’s power to regulate surveys and obtain the names of those who commissioned, paid for, or subscribed to them.
Explaining the rationale for the registration, Garcia said Comelec’s “only purpose is to regulate them, so that not just anybody could conduct a survey. The Supreme Court said that surveys are allowed and that their real purpose is to influence voters. It’s like campaigning. And if we can regulate (campaigning on) newspapers, radio, and television, why not surveys when their purpose is to influence voters?” he asked.
Surveys, regardless of their sound methodology for data gathering, do not capture the whole truth. They are snapshots of public opinion at a given time, and thus survey results are ephemeral. Their prognosis can be overridden when the next survey comes around.
Misinformation and disinformation
But surveys can become meaningful if a pattern or trend emerges over time.
(For instance, by tracking survey results of self-rated poverty under a given administration or discovering voter preferences among the same set of candidates during an election.)
The National Movement for Free Elections has raised alarm over certain groups that are spreading misinformation and disinformation. According to Eric Jude Alvia, the poll watchdog’s secretary general, these groups that claim to be legitimate survey firms “are everywhere and publishing their supposedly preelection surveys. However, their goal is not to publish the truth but to manipulate the perception of voters.”
It’s time for the Comelec to expose these disinformation agents, which would protect Filipinos from voter manipulation that could hijack our electoral process.
—————-
For comments: mubac@inquirer.com.ph
