14/01/2025
SIGRAB | From Meme to Mandate
We laugh, we share, we meme—but in doing so, we unwittingly pave the road for unfit leaders to ascend to power. Social media has become a fertile ground where ridicule transforms into recognition and where infamy is often mistaken for influence. It’s a paradox of the digital age: mocking a candidate doesn’t diminish their chances; it amplifies them. The case of B**g Revilla—jailed for plunder, then waltzing back into the Senate after a viral “Budots” dance—is a glaring reminder of how our collective online behavior can elevate undeserving individuals to positions of power.
In the 2019 elections, Ramon “B**g” Revilla Jr. was elected as a senator despite being detained for four years on charges of plunder related to the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF) scam. Revilla’s campaign lacked substantial policy discussion; instead, it leaned on the virality of his Budots dance, which became an online sensation. What was intended as satire or mockery instead gave him widespread visibility. Revilla himself credited the dance for his electoral success, stating, "Syempre malaking bagay din ’yung mga ad, ’yung budots malaking bagay din."
This phenomenon isn’t isolated. Studies show that the attention economy of social media—where algorithms prioritize engagement—rewards controversy and sensationalism. A report by the University of the Philippines found that social media was critical in the production, transmission, and reception of election-related information, resulting in offline and online polarization and mobilization of Filipino voters in the 2022 elections.
Mockery as a Free Campaign Tool
In the digital age, algorithms reward engagement above all else. When a candidate’s actions—no matter how absurd—go viral, platforms like Facebook and Twitter amplify their visibility. A 2021 study by Social Media Today found that online posts mocking politicians often gain more traction than serious discussions about their platforms, inadvertently turning satire into free publicity. As Angel Martinez aptly noted in her article, "What’s the point of all these singing and dancing politicians, anyway?" published by PhilSTAR Life on February 24, 2022, “The ability to establish common ground with common folk proves necessary at a time when public approval depends on perceived personality.” Such gimmicks raise critical questions about the effectiveness—and pitfalls—of traditional campaign strategies.
In the Philippines, where over 70% of the population uses social media daily (We Are Social, 2023), this dynamic plays an outsized role in shaping public perception. Memes, parodies, and TikTok trends mocking politicians are shared without considering the unintended consequences. Familiarity breeds normalization, and for many voters, that familiarity translates into trust.
The Case of Online Influence in Elections
Consider the 2022 presidential campaign, where online platforms played a pivotal role. Ferdinand "B**gbong" Marcos Jr.’s social media strategy capitalized on this phenomenon—not necessarily through mockery, but through calculated virality—talks and memes about the Tallano gold, nutribun, and the like. However, his critics inadvertently contributed by sharing memes and videos that kept his name trending.
I’ll admit—I was one of those people who had a good laugh at the memes. From jokes about the mysterious Tallano gold to the absurd claims about turning into a nutribun, the posts were too ridiculous not to share. I found myself reposting them more than once, thinking it was all in good fun. I wasn’t even a supporter, yet I unintentionally contributed to keeping his name—and his narratives—alive in the public conversation. I remember friends messaging me with laughing emojis, saying, “Is this real?” or “What is he even talking about?” It felt harmless at the time, but in hindsight, I realized I had played a small part in amplifying his reach.
This mirrors earlier instances where mockery of candidates like B**g Revilla, Isko Moreno’s TikTok antics, or Mocha Uson’s controversial statements have only broadened their reach.
Why It Happens and What It Means
The problem lies in the psychology of social media consumption. According to a study published in the Journal of Political Marketing, repeated exposure—even to negative portrayals—makes candidates more familiar and, paradoxically, more appealing to undecided voters. Filipinos’ love for humor and memes further complicates the issue. What starts as satire often ends up humanizing and even endearing these figures to the public.
Additionally, the blurred line between entertainment and politics makes voters susceptible to emotional narratives rather than rational analysis. Mockery oversimplifies complex issues, reducing serious flaws into punchlines. Instead of critically engaging with candidates’ platforms, voters focus on the entertainment value of their personas.
Acknowledging the Role of Satire
Critics may argue that satire and ridicule are legitimate tools of political dissent. They claim humor can expose the incompetence or absurdity of public figures. And to some extent, this is true—satire has long been a weapon of the powerless against the powerful. However, the difference lies in ex*****on and intent. While incisive satire deconstructs, careless mockery amplifies without context, reducing complex issues to shareable punchlines that inadvertently benefit the targets of ridicule.
I once shared a meme mocking a politician infamous for their incompetence, thinking it was a harmless way to express frustration. But I realized its unintended consequences when an acquaintance, unfamiliar with the politician's controversies, commented on the post, laughing at the absurdity but missing the point entirely. For them, it wasn’t an indictment of poor leadership but just another viral joke. This made me question whether my action had contributed to meaningful dialogue or merely amplified the politician’s visibility, reinforcing their presence in the public’s consciousness without addressing the underlying issues.
On the other hand, proponents of sharing these satirical or mocking contents might argue that such material has a broader reach, potentially informing those who might otherwise remain unaware of the politicians’ misconduct or flaws. A meme or a viral video can spark curiosity or encourage viewers to dig deeper into the issues at hand. This side of the argument emphasizes the democratization of information through social media, where even informal content can challenge traditional power structures and bring vital conversations into the public sphere.
Yet, this approach can backfire when the content reaches people without proper context, leaving them to interpret the message superficially. For those unfamiliar with the politician’s wrongdoings, the mockery might appear as mere entertainment or even an endorsement, further muddying the waters of political discourse. The risk lies in the potential for misinformation or for the satire to lose its critical edge, turning it into another piece of viral noise that inadvertently bolsters the subject’s visibility.
Thus, while satire and ridicule hold undeniable power, their impact largely depends on how they are shared, understood, and contextualized. It’s a double-edged sword—capable of enlightening the uninformed but equally prone to misfire in a media landscape that thrives on virality over substance.
The Way Forward: Think Before You Share
So, what can we do to prevent mockery from turning into free campaign material? The answer lies in a collective shift from ridicule to accountability. Instead of sharing viral antics, we should amplify content that scrutinizes politicians’ policies and platforms. Promote fact-based discourse over sensationalism—content that informs and educates voters rather than merely entertains.
This change starts with awareness. Social media users must understand that every share, like, or comment fuels algorithms that decide what content trends. Mockery may seem harmless, but it inadvertently contributes to the visibility of the very figures we aim to critique. By consciously choosing to engage with and share meaningful, issue-driven content, we can help steer the conversation toward accountability and away from frivolity.
In this age of digital influence, thinking before sharing is more than a personal responsibility—it’s a civic duty. By focusing on constructive engagement and advocating for systemic changes, we can collectively foster a more informed and discerning electorate. The power to reshape our political landscape is in our hands, one click at a time.
The Power Is in Our Hands
If we continue to turn elections into a digital circus, we can’t be surprised when clowns end up in office. Every click, share, or comment matters. Mockery may feel like resistance, but without accountability and context, it often serves as free promotion for the very people we aim to reject.
As the 2025 elections approach, let’s be mindful of how we engage with political content. Let’s choose to amplify the voices that demand accountability, integrity, and competence. The power to reshape our political future lies in our hands—or rather, in our clicks—if only we choose to wield it wisely. Ridicule is not resistance. Accountability is. It is time to stop laughing at the joke, only to cry over its consequences when it’s too late.
Disclaimer: SIGRAB is the official name of The Technopacer - Talisay’s segment for column or opinion writing entries. The views and opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of the publication and the University.
Column | Drei Azucena
Layout and Graphics | Anne Buenaflor
