Part six of seven. Edwin Espejo published this series on Facebook in June and July 2021. It is republished here in full and lightly copyedited; the introduction below is mine, not his. I am a subject of the series as well as its publisher. It concerns the 2016 campaign and not subsequent events, including the proceedings now before the International Criminal Court. Full editorial note and series index →
Introduction by Nic Gabunada
They like to call us trolls. It is a convenient word. If the movement was fake, nobody has to sit with the uncomfortable part — that millions of Filipinos were simply fed up.
Every time someone reduces 2016 to digital manipulation, they are insulting the people who actually built that result. It was not bots. It was the masa finally having somewhere to be heard, behind a candidate who did not speak in polished lines but in the language of the street — someone who sounded like he had actually met the jeepney driver and the mother working out how to put food on the table.
Edwin gets this right. You cannot manufacture a sentiment that deep, and you cannot decapitate one either.
— Nic Gabunada
Decapitating the ‘Trolls’ of Duterte
Sixth of a series
By Edwin Espejo | July 2, 2021
The opposition should not make mistakes about Duterte.
Duterte’s victory in 2016 was an exact mix of the right and dedicated people who joined his campaign machinery, perfect political timing, efficient campaign strategy that was people-driven and a very engaged citizenry spread throughout the country.
His throng of supporters, in the end, came not only from the masses but also from the middle class and a section of the political elite, the latter two jumping in when the Duterte bandwagon began to steamroll.
Duterte was the anti-thesis of everything in Philippine politics when he ran for president in 2016.
He was an outsider. He did not have the campaign machinery and the resources. He was self-effacing to the point that he himself was able to get away with his perceived and sometimes admitted weaknesses. He was shocking in his singular campaign narrative of drugs, crime and corruption. But he was embraced by the people who voted for him because he spoke their language and captured their frustrations in government and governance.
Duterte was a product that was sold in 2016. To quote a marketing adage, the ad men can only be effective as the product they are selling.
He was neither a mainstream nor a social media creation. He was his own man.
Duterte was not also the perfect guy. He just happened to be at the perfect time.
(To be continued)
Edwin Espejo is a journalist based in General Santos City who has written for Asian Correspondent and MindaNews and shoots for Agence France-Presse. He chaired the General Santos City chapter of the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines, and in 2012 was sued for ₱75 million by then-congressman Manny Pacquiao over his reporting. He served as a commissioner of the National Commission of Senior Citizens from January 2021 to April 2026, including when this series was written. Fuller biographical note →
Notes:
Decapitating the ‘trolls’ of Duterte — Edwin Espejo’s seven-part series
Part 1 — Decapitating the ‘trolls’ of Duterte: A 7-Part Retrospective
Part 2 — The Anatomy of a Disconnect: Why the ‘Troll’ Narrative Failed to Explain 2016
Part 3 — The Unseen Momentum: Rewriting the Rules of Engagement
Part 4 — A Target Board Over My Back
Part 5 — The Story That Comes Back Every Election Season
Part 6 — The Ad Men Can Only Be as Good as the Product (you are here)
Part 7 — Beyond the ‘Troll’ Label: A Reality Check for the Opposition
This post was published on March 24, 2024. My introduction has been revised. The original text has been lightly copyedited for typographical errors. No argument, characterization or judgment in Edwin Espejo’s original has been altered.
