Five Ways the Duterte Influence Machine is Deceiving Filipinos

The fate of Vice President Sara Duterte's impeachment is now uncertain. But months before recent developments in the Senate and Supreme Court, the Duterte's allied influencers and accounts see that various narratives across social media, the cast doubt on the case, and dampen public outrage. Their goal? To make the discontinuation of an impeachment case against Sara Duterte acceptable to the Filipino public. This is Regina Bato for Tech Attack and News powered by Pomopodcast. I pass their narratives for the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism with open source intelligence research or G.N. Libot, who joins us today. G.N. Thanks for coming on. Our PCIJ story, five ways the Duterte Influence Machine is deceiving Filipinos, is up online. In it, we argue that the pro-Duterte machinery is a cyborg operation that is part machinery, trolls, and possibly AI-powered tools, and part human, organic, true supporters. And we argue that this machine has kind of been working over the past few months to feed the Filipino public a steady diet of pro-Duterte propaganda in relation to the impeachment. Thanks, Reg. Nice to be here. So for everyone's reference, the story is now published on PCIJ. It's called Five Ways the Duterte Influence Machine is deceiving Filipinos. And in it, G.N. and I argue that the Duterte Influence Machine is basically what we call a cyborg operation that is part machinery, that is trolls, possibly AI-powered tools, and part human that is part organic true supporters. And that this machine has kind of been working over the past few months to feed the Filipino public a steady diet of pro-Duterte propaganda in relation to the impeachment. G.N. maybe you could share a bit about your main takeaways from our overview of what the machine is like. We've both been monitoring it for a while. And one of the things that people I think are most curious about is how much of the machine is real, as in real people, and how much of the machine is a machinery that is coordinated inauthentic behavior slash trolls slash fake accounts. Yeah, so I think the word we sort of use to describe this is like a cyborg operation. So it's a, I guess in many ways it's a hybrid because there are elements of course, so like, I guess, a thought-out architecture, you know, narratives are definitely not purely machine-generated. But at the same time, the distribution, especially the prevailing use of what we often call inauthentic like low-quality or cheap fakes or bought accounts because that's how it was referenced before, have lots of elements that kind of indicate that it could be, you know, massively distributed through, I guess in many ways, an AI-enhanced network. And that kind of like cyborg operation has been, I wouldn't say it's new, but it's been enhanced steadily over the last few years. I think it's a part course with the development of technology as well. Some of these are commercial use. So, you know, I think we have to inform a listener, it's not, you know, a kind of evil villainous design that's just been created in a laboratory out of the blue. These are things that everyday people use. It's just used in a different way. So, the technology's value neutral. The way it's being used is definitely the thing that's problematic here. Just for the reference of our listeners, GN is an open source investigation researcher and analyst. So, in short, that's abbreviated as O-Santa. And it's a special skill that kind of allows, like for a specific type of research where you're able to analyze whether or not the network is engaging in authentic behavior, in a troll-like behavior as we would call it. And to what extent? GN, what are, or what makes this, this particular issue? And at all, particular trends that happens in that in a with regard to the Duterte and the impeachment this year, what makes it different from the Duterte operation, pro-Duterte operations that we have monitored before, as well as other influence operations across the political aisle? Yeah. In this case, we probably have to like go back a few years earlier, which is like, you know, as early as 2016, I think the whole concept of this information and the use of like trolls came about in the awareness of Philippine society. Many of us have come across like fake coat guards. That was like the way it was before. And generally, the steady dose of like correcting facts from the lies was the default response. But over the last few years, especially after 2022, we've at least in general society has been confronted with the reality that this information aspect is no longer really limited to completely factual or infactual incidents online. A lot of it is just like narrative bending or manipulation. So it doesn't necessarily mean that what accounts are doing are necessarily false, but they could be misleading because they cherry pick an example. So it's gotten a lot more clever. And what we're seeing, especially with the five tactics that we've shown so far, is that it's very hard, for example, to fact check them on face value because it's not necessarily they're telling a lie or they're like, you know, coming up with with fictitious issues, maybe some absurd claims, but at the same time, it mostly has to do with bending narratives. So for example, I think when we've seen this feedback, you know, the use of baby photos or like baby fication of some of the the terrorist speeches before on face value, it's not necessarily a bad thing, you know, it's generally what can be used in today's technology. There's lots of AI filters that can be done with that. But I think the question we need to ask is, you know, why are some of these specific accounts doing that, like 100% is it to just share the good image of previous administration, or is it to, you know, create a narrative of a much more softer leaning image against what they're confronted with right now, which is the the issue on the war on drugs. And we've seen this, Reg, you've done an issue on this before with Indonesia, for example, and so and the the winning president's use of forgot the term for that one, but like, he also, he was like a cute uncle, because he had like a very, very new image. Usong, uso, you know, if not the baby photos, you know, the fan came, you know, and the colorification, I call it colorification of our politicians. And you're right on the service, Indonesia outright harmful people view it as entertaining, but there's a secondary function to that, which is Namagpahyut, Patawa. It makes light, no, of all the possibly, you know, violent, possibly problematic issues that may be connected to the politician involved, and that doesn't just go for the third test. And that hits us, I think, if we're not careful, that hits us at a very visceral level, you know, appeal to appeal. And that falls, I think, honestly, under the emotional manipulation, if people are not careful about it, which is one of the four five things that we have brought up in our BCIJ story. The other four are in this missile and the Nile of Facts, the distortion or mudding of interpretations, not. And in the first and second cases, that have to do specifically with the Supreme Court case. So all the legal jargon and second with the audit, the facts of the audit, so all the financial jargon. Third, the There's this destruction and deflection. The fourth is emotional manipulation and the fifth is Your conspiracy theories. So it's a hint. Nothing shall do you know the first thing Is this missile and the storm fund and relation to the recent supreme court decision and What we observe that has kind of been a range of things so that our outright lies like for example There's been a viral Facebook post fact checked by Rapler that straight up says or credits Fake claim that the supreme court declared sorry to the innocent attributing it to associate justice marvelion and And it ranges from that the straight apply to all these legal Judicial and legal interpretations that favor the Duterte's That say for example that Practically means or functionally means that the third day is innocent when actually the Read more accurate The more accurate read is that it's really just the it is a legal legal victory Yes, but there is no proclamation of innocence. So the evidence has not been debunked at all at the supreme court level One of the things we notice GN is that there seems to be a rise in these op-eds and long form Essays on Facebook and they're usually written in English and They provide all of this Supposed legal interpretations Financial interpretations or whatever that favor the Duterte's Who do these typically come from and what are our observations of Aton behavior nato So a lot of these accounts have a very specific branding, I would say they come across as like I guess intellectual very serious talking pages So they've established themselves as kind of like a thought leadership within the Duterte circle. They come up with You know very long written alleged written essays that Try to substantiate Defense of a politician or a patron on on a specific issue The one thing that's really been interesting is you know this kind of development is On the surface level very counterintuitive because for anybody who's worked on social media There's always been this Revealing wisdom You know you need to produce something that's quick. That's fast. That's easy to read One paragraph is too much, you know, there's even I think before a lot a lot of like marketing circles They they would often say you know keep it to you know very limited characters smaller than like the the usual Twitter posts before but this is like Inverting that logic behind because as what we've seen some of these posts by like optic Optic politics for example the political blogger or jan writer really really long lengthy posts now you could probably take up like two to three pages On one hand, there's like I think for for us There's a there's a little bit of suspicion whether or not this is organically written could be AI enhanced or at the very least AI corrected I guess for the grammar and everything else But on the other hand, it's also interesting why they've chosen this and I guess as far as What we've seen it seems to be generating a lot of buzz and a lot of Engagement I think on the other hand, I think it would be interesting from your end-rage what you Read on this because on many ways, you know, it's a it's very counter-intuitive to the usual wisdom of of posting on social media Yeah, I Think it fulfills a function there across the political aisle other influencers have been doing it I myself admitted we have also had some some social media essays and that have surprisingly Made me go viral a couple of times, but not as viral at all not nowhere near as close to as viral as the DDS So it's happening across the political aisle, but all of these pages now on the part of the the prodator to come they vastly outnumber right the pages of any other People of other political leanings, right and the other thing that I noticed. I know is that most Prodator the pages, but I know that all the influencers like the ones who are someone to Congress most of them are actually anonymous Which really Removes I think like that that layer of accountability for the stuff that you say online and the function really that I think that they fulfill To borrow a term from one of the Puma podcast producers J. Mark Tordesilia is that they are the quote-unquote think tank of The third account and the one way that I kind of see it is a thermal so that's used by Atlantic Errider's Charlie Warrzel and Mike Colfield When they were talking about the pro Trump Quote-unquote brainwashing machine. They called it Adjustification machine. So the influence machinery is Is like I think Supposed to supply supporters with the argumentation with the moral Ethical pseudo intellectual Legal supposedly jargon and arguments that they need in order to justify They're already late that political bias. So it's not about I think Convincing new people, no, it's more about you already have a solid political base But because all of these things are so absurd like take for example at the Merry Grace piatos. It should be so obvious that this is a fake name, right? It should be so obvious that Carlos Luigi it would and rage anybody No, not that all of these people have made it and these fake receipts and yet we have all of these people turning out like all the all these misleading Interpretations of audit rules and this leads to your second trend. You know, that's it. This is the fudging of this fudging of Rules, not in with regard to the audit to distort the facts. You argue met that it's an unimensied Merry Grace piatos code name, and et cetera, et cetera, which we debout in our story based off of Speaking to budget experts, no, but basically because the standards get more and more absurd in the political realm Supporters who want to maintain their support for the politician. They just need to have a balance, right? For the arguments that they will have they have to justify it to themselves and These anonymous pages and think this think tank That they're the ones who supply that can you feel go Can you talk about it? This is a scene you know, even if these essays would not Would not pass a peer review Right, I think that's that's very indicative of another term we use in Like social media studies, which is like a wild garden Where and you have like, you know, a captive audience and Generally, I think it it does support this whole concept of justification because You have a captive audience of I guess like minded like political Followers and it's not just that they need to be constantly fed with Arguments in support of their decision to align politically But it's also because you since you have a captive audience you can kind of bend the rules and the You know go against the usual wisdom of Quick and fast content. There's already an appetite, you know for feeding much more longer form content and maybe in some ways and we've seen this Quite a number of the the content specifically, you know only a small percent of it is actually I guess correct a lot of it is misleading a lot of it is cherry-picking Certain perspectives, but you know, how do you expect a critical public or audience to Guard against that when at the beginning you already be Barang and okay, we disposed cannot to believe whatever this figure says because you know you associate them with being smart with being such an intelligent Writer so yeah, it's kind of like a I guess the way the machine works is a ambitious cycle of feeding itself and the the more you feed it, the more you gain patronage and loyalists. Yeah, yeah. And I think that circles back to our suspicion that some of these essays might be, if not AI written, AI enhanced. What makes it difficult, I think, or what makes things work in favor of the Duterte camp is that there's just so much of it. And for me, that's a major hotel sign that it could be AI enhanced or AI assisted because just like what you win can come up with that much content, right? If you're just like one person running a single page in a single day, but other supply dictates the demand, and that kind of also, I guess, could build the algorithm in favor of the Pro Duterte stance, and that's why it's quite an uphill battle for anybody who wants to do fact checking, who wants to do in depth reporting because there's a much slower process of analysis. That's the kind of kind of head start, and Tio, where we're behind in that sense. Onto the second point, Ian, we already brushed up a bit on the audit and all the distortions about the audit, but there was another thing that we noticed, which is also mentioned in our story, the Pug flood, which we also called comet seeding, and it's also a form of astroturfing, if some of the list are familiar with that, which is basically when a flood of accounts say the same thing, all in the same post to create an illusion of majority, and the particular example that we cited here in the PCIJ was a post that I noticed as far back as March, when we uploaded the news 5, an updated list of fake names, which included Jika Motte, Miyagi Mango, etc. And the post drew over 26,000 comments, most of which were all saying that it was and that these names are an alias or a code name. What did you think of that, Ian, when I sent you that post? I think we need to also look at the 26,000 in like broader perspective. There will be some people comments there that are coming from real accounts, but there are also a lot of it coming from like fictitious low quality accounts that really just provide some level of reinforcement, on the comment. And the way, I think the way I want people to understand this concept of astroturf, because it's a very technical term, imagine if you're in a room, just to say 100 people, and say 30 people are sort of planted there, so small percentage are planted there, to say out loud that the building is on fire. And the rest have no idea, but also like maraming well information or whether or not it's true. Most often than not, even if we just assume 10% of that converts and believes the 30 individuals, you'd already have some kind of like snowball effect on the whole concept, but the building is really on fire. And that's how I think we have to imagine this whole concept of astroturfing, and it's being done digitally. So if you're just an average viewer, you're a follower of News 5, and you saw the headline, you clicked on it, you saw the comments, you start to doubt the parang, is this really true? And then the seating of the narratives starts to get infused there, because even without me, let's just say I'm just a parang politically neutral, if there's such a thing right now, or bystander lung. You see that, and you start thinking, maybe it's correct, maybe what these people are talking about might be true. And we have reason to believe that this is, in many ways, hyper coordinated, because it's not the first time they've done this. If you look at the accounts themselves, they notoriously already are politically leaning or dedicate like 90% of their content on politics. Again, it goes back to this whole conventional wisdom on, you know, is an average user really that politically invested to dedicate majority of their time. And I guess on the other hand, this is something that needs to also be discussed. If you look at the real analysis on the budget, and we had the chance to talk about this with our budget analyst, the alibi just doesn't really fly, right, redge on the conversation we had. Yeah, absolutely. And just for the record, so that people know, and this is all in the article, the rule is that if these code names were actually real, and if they were actual security assets like these accounts, broad other accounts are saying, then those those names should have been disclosed in a sealed envelope with identities that were still revealed to the state audit or, but in the case of the case, because if they were actually disclosed in an envelope, then we wouldn't know all these names. And the goal would not have issued a notice of this allowance. They would not have flagged the confidential funds in the first place. So the fact that my notice of this allowance is in itself problematic. And that's coming from analysis from various budget analysts, as well as from legal experts, legal experts as well. So that's just for for everyone's information. I'll give another example as well. Janodak, we talked about that is not in this story in particular. But which shows to me, there's a lot of, I would say, Modos, that these people or who are attacking the public comment sections on Facebook, the news outlet, which is if everyone remembers the fight, that we in PNP chief, Tore and and acting about Mayor Baste Duterte. So no, no, no show, see acting Mayor Baste Duterte and Tomolo, the event of PNP. A lot of people, I think we're entertained was the object of many meanings and stuff. But if, but I noticed on the GMA news, comment section of the breaking news article about that event on the morning that it was supposed to happen within 15 minutes, there were already 1000 comments. And most of them were promised that. I'm not saying that they were all fake. I'm sure some of them were real, but it was just way too many. When in other comment sections prior to the event, it was a more of a mix, no? And the things that happened, it seems like a script, you know? The one who was talking about distraction, you know, when actually the event was a flood fundraiser to begin with, east of funds, down, waste of resources, down, etc. But then at the event, as we know, went on to raise 20 million pesos. And then the third was kind of some kind of mental gymnastics, Sinajadao, your pocket schedule on this day to make Baste Duterte, etc, etc. When he didn't even RSVP earlier as well to begin with. Oh, it was the same within, I checked the post again in 30 minutes and in 45 minutes until it grew to around 4000 comments. And it got a little more diverse, but the vast majority were still pro Duterte. And for me, that was a red flag that I did not think that this was organic at all. And I think that people should be aware that even if accounts look like they're real people, they could not be, right? It seems like they're not. They're not indicators. I would say if they have like a real person's profile picture or the profile picture looks real, it's not an indicator anymore of whether or not an account is authentic. The one thing I would often caution is, especially in the field of social media and metrics and engagement, to be very careful with associating high traffic with authenticity. because we've seen this in the past, 2016, 2020, 2019, 2020, two various studies have really said that the Philippines is a, is a, is a, is a petri dish, is a laboratory, is a growing cottage industry. I don't think the cottage industry is, is even relevant anymore. It's a, it's a big operation when it comes to this information. And it's not just politics. This happens in everyday life with like scams, you know, people who get some of their personal information taken from them from, from phishing, from even trafficking victims. So these are all modular in many ways. So we can't say that this kind of risk doesn't exist. So we need to be very careful when we're seeing high traffic like this and, and taking as what the words of the vice, the acting near says, if there's high engagement, it has to be true, which is the his report against against that argument. I don't think that's necessarily the case when it comes to stuff online. Absolutely, absolutely. There are a couple of points now to transition to one of the next narratives that we also observed. It should also be said that with regard to the story of the audit rules, it's a small claim that there are a lot of them in the PCIJ story. It's an idea of unmodified opinion, being, being basically like the green flag on Saturday Thursday's expenditure when actually that is not necessarily the case. And we explain why in in the story. But there are some proofs or some evidence of coordinated and authentic behavior that Jean and I found in relation to that. First, that argument, this unmodified opinion, and this whole code name, MMM. The last year, the narrative of the narrative, and how do we know? So first, we noticed it first in March, right? At least in the public comment section. But when we were speaking to the expert that we spoke to, she shared with us on the record that her Facebook was suspended. She was attacked by trolls and when she was being attacked by trolls last year for debunking all these misconceptions surrounding the audit, you know, you know, arguments at all. Oh, unmodified opinion, et cetera, et cetera. And we've traced it also to one post in December by Harry Rock. I'm not sure if there was any other, if there were any other ones before that. But basically, all this to say that these arguments to twist the facts around the audit and the discrepancies in the VP budget, they are being recycled and they've been recycled for around a year now or going on one year. And let me know what you think, Gian. The goal of this is to make a impression on the Filipino public. Now, there's no need for a budget of VP. It's to slowly condition people. I hesitate to use that word, but because we can choose not to be conditioned, right? But that's the image that they're trying to project. And they're doing that by repeating these arguments every every month or so. Like last month or a couple of months ago, this whole unmodified opinion thing was rebutted by Heidi Mendoza on facts first, the Christianist Guerra. But it was also rebutted by that in fact, checks months ago by check pH. So they're recycling the same thing because they want to sell this idea to the Filipino public or at least to the Duterte supporters base. That there's nothing wrong with the budget when there is in fact. Or the very least, you know, there's a there's a demand for accountability there that needs to be explained in a proper forum, whether it's through impeachment or through other means that the vice president needs to answer the problem with how the narratives are being framed right now. And you're right, it's really complicated financial or like public financing know how. So maybe some of it is partially true. That's why we often use the word misleading or like cherry picking examples. Because at the end of the day, we don't really know for certain whether there's like a clear violation. But most budget experts have commented that it raises red flags that there's a cause or concern. Whether or not that ends up to be true or not, that's still up for not even debate up for investigation and clear authentication. The problem with the seeding of the narratives that they're convinced of their own argument and they're repeating it. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. One of the other recurring things, which we already brushed up on as well, is your idea to distract and that was also another recurring argument. This is a moment section seeding in the Pansin Natin. And you already brushed up on the fourth as well that these narratives tend to emotionally appeal to the public. That is painted as victims. I think it brings to I guess to memory the whole if you if you take a step back and you look at the five pieces fitting together. It does feel like it's somewhat disjointed. But on the other hand, it also does fall into you know a more coherent playbook, which is to establish first and foremost a connection with their followers. Because say, of course, you're trying to create this sort of like loyalist sentiment. And in order to do that, you need to paint your patron as some sort of political victim in this case. So raising arguments that pull to emotion, for example, like say that the innocent baby videos that we talked about a while ago, they're not purely innocent because on one hand, some of it is drawing conversations between the vice presidents current, some of her current speeches abroad relating her experiences with her father, not really related to anything, but it creates that kind of like emotional connection with the with the followers. And then on the other hand, you have you know much more lengthier discussions like with the with the AI generated video saying that there are other issues that we're facing in the country, you know, you have the GAAA issue of the of the Marcos S, which you know contrary to what the narratives are promoting right now, there has been steady criticisms even from political oppositions within the house to discuss the GAAA even even more. So, you know, a lot of what what about this? I think that's the normal other usual term to be used in studying propaganda. Again, all of this goes back to first painting patrons as political victims and then throwing other issues in the picture. So yeah, you have like other issues that needs to be dealt with, but as we as we pointed out in our in in the article, these aren't really mutually exclusive. Like you can deal with with these issues and we have dealt with those issues or these institutions have tried to deal with those issues, but it doesn't remove culpability or like accountability on this specific issue on on the confidential fund specifically. Absolutely. So it's two things not the emotion, emotional connection and economy. So the appealing to the gut to the bread and butter issues, but you're completely right. These are not either or not. It's not a zero-sum game. We can, you know, tackle all these issues at the same time raised all of these issues at the same time. There is, I think, China as well. We noticed a kind of selectivity in the way these arguments are deployed and these are some of the things that were kind of complicated that we may not have mentioned anymore in the article, but one thing that we noticed right was this trend of discrediting experts. So one of the experts that we we quoted as ISIS-Azara was one who was harassed on social media. And as we know former finance undersecretary Shalam Agna is also one. She's filed a case against the Duterte vlogger, for the Duterte vlogger. But I noticed also and let me know if you've noticed the same thing. That, when Shalam Agna for For example, criticize the GAA, that the prototype machinery uses her arguments and uses her content, actually. But then when she's criticizing the third expenditure, they go on a full attack against her. And it was the same way as well with the Supreme Court, that when the Supreme Court was perceived to have a prototype decision, heaps of process for the Supreme Court. But when they could not do anything about the ICC case, so much harassment. And I think one thing that Shannon, I want to point out here, is that this kind of toxic discourse really is meant to undermine trust in institutions and in academics and in experts. Yeah, but at the end of the day, it's not about whether what they're saying is true. It's mostly about whether what they're saying favors their politics or their political side. I think the way we described it in the article is, we call it like a hostile media effect. So something that favors them, they celebrate it. But if it's unfavorable, they criticize the institution, they criticize the individual. And the cello magna example is really, really obvious, because we saw before when she raised issues on the GAA and on the budget, she was being supported by a prototype networks. Or at least her thoughts were being raised. No way. Take a look at this, even somebody from the Marcus administration who was part of the Marcus administration is criticizing it. It needs to be tackled. But then when she started also discussing the whole confidential funds issue, then she started getting attacked as well and painted in a different way. The fifth narrative is this is a spread of conspiracy theories. And in particular, we notice that there is a tendency to blame the US, blame the communists, blame the liberal media. This abstract concept of the enemy, and this enemy is a mastermind, not a impeachment case of vice president. And what are the copy-based scheme, Janok, could you tell us about it? Yeah, the copy-based or the copy-pastas, what the reddit, if you're on reddit, have described it. But it really starts with this whole headline that the determination of the legal victory of the Goethe or the vice president's camp on the Supreme Court revealed or exposed this brother truth. It's a lengthy essay, but the whole narrative around it is that the vice president is up against a much bigger power. He's not just up against the deep state of the US, but he's also against the pink politicians or the pink loud ones, they call it online. And he's also up against the communist insurgents as well, who are allegedly still embedded within many different parts of society. I think if we take a look at this argument on face value, it seems really, really hard to digest in many ways kind of absurd, because how will all of these figures relate to each other? When in fact, some of them are kind of like contradicting each other, and you can talk about how the contradictions happen, but in a way, this really represents a much more broader argument, which is in order to, again, cement loyalty to create sort of like some tribal protective instinct from followers, you really need to create an enemy, and it's not enough to create the enemy out of the sitting president. You need to create a much more bigger enemy, which is like touching on geopolitics or the deep, or the deep state, I guess, in many ways. But it's obviously not as simple as that. And it is also not as complicated as that, no? That being said, Jenna, we've gone through the whole list of our general narratives that we found. And for you to read about it more, log on to PCIJ and read the story there. But all of that being said, what should our readers do with this information, and what can the regular Filipino media consumer do when faced with this type of this information? I think we need to be very careful in general with the public, with what we consume online. I think that's sort of like the broad lesson. It doesn't mean that you can't stop trusting people that you know, of course. But we also need to be careful with how there are attempts to manipulate and skew our perspectives online as well. And the reality is this kind of article in our part, it's a small effort to reveal tactics. And the whole aspect of the tactics is for you to, in the future, if you see iterations of this, or innovations of this, to be careful, at least second guess, or if it's something or is there something else behind it? But also, I go back to this whole concept of, they call this the brandolini lo. It's an internet concept that was popularized by Alberto Brandolini. And the whole concept behind it is that the amount of energy we take in deciphering all these tactics, you know, fails in comparison to the order and magnitude of how it's being done online. So sure, we have this interesting deep dive that we've done, and you and I both have gone through major efforts to do it. But while we're speaking, the machine still is working, and it's working on stuff. And it's turning you stuff up for no counting. So at this very moment, you have a lot of tactics, so I hope you see the whole discussion on tactics as a tale of caution and also to, yeah, to be critical of about, you know, there's an attempt to steer you towards a particular direction with what you're eating online. Yeah. As well as a tale of caution as well as an ongoing conversation, which is why also, like, oh, how I would answer that question is, I'd also like to appeal to our listeners, to readers, to allies of information integrity and democracy, that if you see, as GN said, iterations and innovations of this information tactics, please flag them to journalists. There are tip lines, for example, for verifiles, for Rappler journalists like myself, who cover this are constantly lurking on Reddit and on social media to find this. So feel free to tip a journalist, warn people about it on social media. And if you come on the receiving end of harassment, the best thing that you can do as a favor to yourself is to document it. I think that a lot of people get scared and, you know, they activate right away, which is what the trolls want. And I think that there is also peace of mind to be had from stepping away from a toxic environment like that, but if you are in a position, you can tap a friend and you can ask for help in documenting that phenomenon. And it could be a very helpful data, if not for journalists, for yourself, for a future legal case, for example. So we have to develop, I think, Tio, in like as a regular netizens, we have to develop that kind of awareness also, no, on our part. So that we're not, um, we need time to move on. If we come under receiving end of this malign influence machine, thank you so much to everyone for tuning into this long conversation. Our story is out on the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism. It's called Five Ways, the Duterta Intluence Machine is the receiving Filipinos. This has been the origin of Bato and GM LiBot for Tech and Tech and News, powered by Pomobodcast. This episode was engineered by me, Anthony Top Yes. Jay Mark Dordicilia is our editor at large. If you liked how we do conversations, follow us on Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts. For more updates, we're also on Facebook, X, Instagram, and TikTok. Thank you for listening, and until next time. (upbeat music)