COMMUNICATIONS students — of the social science and engineering varieties — are familiar with the definition of information as the measure of uncertainty. The more uncertain the situation, the more information one will need. Vice versa, the less uncertain, the less information is necessary.
Such is the case in the days leading to an election. We are now just a month away from May 12 and we still know very little about what our candidates are offering us by way of policy.
Aspirants use the campaign period to portray themselves as the better option. People need information to choose wisely 12 senators, a House representative, a party-list group, and several provincial and municipal councilors officials.
In reality, we’d be happy to even know which ones are running. What they stand for is another thing.
‘… we should even be thankful to those candidates who shoot themselves in the foot with insensitive remarks, as we learned last week.’
On a talk show last year, a celebrity who earlier that day filed his certificate of candidacy for senator because he wanted “to help poor people,” was asked about specifics of his possible legislative platform. His response: Wait till I win.
For a voter, this is not very helpful. We are limited to those hopefuls who give us what the PR industry calls good “optics.” They showcase their entertainment skills and keep their legislative cards, if any, close to their chest.
From a national data set, we know a few things about a representative sample of Filipino voters. First is that we are enthusiastic and regular voters. Second, more than half claim following the news about politics and government at least several times a week. Yet, most of them said they didn’t have the ability to participate in politics, and that they couldn’t understand what was happening in government.
This apparent contradiction can be explained by front-page coverage of the campaign by the big, English-language daily broadsheets, or the lack or even absence thereof. The little we might see does not give the readers a glimpse of what policies the candidates will support once elected.
In fairness to the media, it is possible that candidates themselves are strategically mum about their platforms. Either they can’t come up with one or they don’t want the electorate to know the issues they embrace. Or, news organizations may lack the resources to field that many reporters to cover all the candidates’ sorties.
Social media can be an alternative source of really useful information, especially from those candidates who have no access to the traditional media. But it is also teeming with misinformation, disinformation, malinformation, deep fakes, what have you. Alas, for those voters who profess low political efficacy, this does not make the exercise of suffrage easier.
For this reason, we should even be thankful to those candidates who shoot themselves in the foot with insensitive remarks, as we learned last week. If the Commission on Elections will not disqualify them, at least voters know who to avoid.
