Fake accounts drove praise of Duterte and now target Philippine election

Supporters of the arrested former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte sing Happy Birthday while holding lit candles and phones during a gathering to mark his 80th birthday in his hometown Davao City, Philippines, March 28, 2025. REUTERS/Eloisa Lopez/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights

| Published April 11, 2025

A recent investigation by the tech firm Cyabra has uncovered a coordinated disinformation campaign in the Philippines involving fake social media accounts. Approximately one-third of the accounts discussing former President Rodrigo Duterte’s arrest by the International Criminal Court (ICC) were found to be inauthentic. These accounts generated over 1,300 posts with 7,000 engagements and a potential reach of 11.8 million views, promoting pro-Duterte narratives and attacking the legitimacy of the ICC. The campaign has extended to the upcoming mid-term elections, with up to 45% of election-related discourse driven by fake accounts. Cyabra described this as “digital warfare,” noting that the tactics aim to create the illusion of public consensus. The fake profiles reportedly also interact with real users to seamlessly blend into discussions. This manipulation follows earlier disinformation efforts that aided Duterte’s 2016 rise to power and reflects ongoing digital influence operations, possibly serving the political contest between the Marcos and Duterte factions. Researchers and analysts warn of the detrimental effects this has on Philippine democracy and emphasize the need for public awareness and resistance to online disinformation.

Implications:

Here are the key implications of the fake accounts driving online narratives in the Philippines, as uncovered by the Reuters investigation:

🔴 1. Erosion of Democratic Integrity

Implication: The widespread use of fake accounts to influence public opinion threatens the credibility of Philippine elections.
Why it matters: It undermines voters’ ability to make informed choices and manipulates public discourse with manufactured consensus.

🟠 Weaponization of Social Media

Implication: Platforms like Facebook and X (formerly Twitter) are being exploited as tools for “digital warfare.”
Why it matters: These tactics—blending fake profiles with real users—make it harder for the public to distinguish fact from propaganda, potentially altering political outcomes.

🟡 Revival of Pro-Duterte Influence Tactics

Implication: The same strategies that helped Duterte rise to power in 2016 are being repurposed to defend him from international accountability and shape future political battles.
Why it matters: It signals ongoing power struggles, especially between the Marcos and Duterte camps, with digital manipulation as a frontline weapon.

🔵 Global Disinformation Risk

Implication: The Philippines continues to be a case study in digital disinformation that other countries may emulate.
Why it matters: These tactics could be exported or mirrored in other democratic elections worldwide, especially in vulnerable or polarized nations.

🟣 Public Trust in Institutions at Risk

Implication: Attacks on the International Criminal Court (ICC) via fake accounts erode trust in global justice mechanisms.
Why it matters: It damages the rule of law and creates a climate where authoritarian narratives can thrive unchallenged.

⚫ Urgent Need for Media Literacy and Regulation

Implication: Without intervention—either by social platforms, government regulation, or citizen awareness—these operations will continue.
Why it matters: The future of fair elections and truthful public discourse may depend on how quickly societies adapt to combat disinformation.

A surge of fake social media accounts in the Philippines is fueling pro-Duterte narratives and distorting political discourse ahead of the 2025 elections, revealing how disinformation remains a powerful tool in shaping public opinion, undermining democratic processes, and escalating factional power struggles—particularly between the Marcos and Duterte camps.