Last week we shared portions of the findings of the research done by the Ateneo University’s Institute of Philippine Culture (IPC) on how the poor view elections and choose their candidates.
IPC’s ``The Vote of the Poor: The Values and Pragmatics of Elections’’ tries to answer the questions: do the poor produce a ``dumb masa’’ vote? What do the poor think of elections? How do they make their choices? How much influence do the media exert on them? What to them are the traits of a true leader?
IPC used focused groups discussions (FGD) as a tool to get to the raw sentiments and perceptions of the subjects.
Here’s more:
The most important sources of influence in the choice of candidates are: media, family, church, political parties, one’s own (sarili lang/walang nakakaimpluwensiya) and surveys.
(In dozens of conferences and forums on all sorts of issues that I’ve attended or covered here and abroad this past decade, the media have always been pointed to as one of the most influential factors in shaping individuals and society. Are schools, churches and families sleeping on the job?)
According to IPC, the mass media appear to play a crucial bridge between the poor’s leadership ideals and the process of choosing candidates. Serious mass media practitioners must consider ways by which their profession can be more effective in playing this all-important role.
To arrive at an informed choice, IPC said, the participants recognize the media as playing a most crucial role. Only among rural participants does the media not figure as the most important source of influence. The family and the church are on top of their list.
While the participants get information from newspapers, radio and TV, the youth also rely on text messages and the Internet. IPC pointed out that across all groups, tsismis (gossip or small talk) figure as a source of information. Discussions (pakikisalamuha) with other people are also deemed important. Urbanites also look to ads, leaflets, campaign streamers to get to know the candidates.
But body language is important too. And here the electronic media has an edge over print. The poor analyze the images projected by candidates via radio or TV to gauge character (ugali). How do the candidates speak and comport themselves?
Rural women look at the candidates’ manner of speaking. Do they ``speak with respect’’? Males also observe the manner of speaking and the face, how the candidates stand or walk and deal with people. Nothing beats a face to face encounter. Urbanites observe these aspects too, plus the candidates’ personal appearance.
Here are some quotes from the FGDs. Sa pananalita malalaman mo kung mabait o magaling. Sa reaksyon niya sa mga tao habang nangangampanya. Physical appearance is a good source for determining behavior.
The youth say they could tell a person’s character by the manner of speaking and responding to questions during a debate. They also study the temper of the candidate. As one young FGD participant said: ``They say liars have unstable eye movements.’’
Despite media’s high ranking, participants still consider the information they get from the media inadequate, particularly in the case of those running for national positions. TV ads are considered unreliable as there is no way to check out the claims.
Election time is a time of confusion, nakakalito. Too many candidates, too many positions to fill. And the information about candidates are not necessarily to be trusted. Maraming paninira ang lumalabas sa mga kandidato, hindi mo alam kung ano ang totoo.
The conduct of elections—whether to be computerized or not, and the validation of registration--has added to the confusion.
As to vote buying and selling, there seems to be a sense that the public ultimately loses if this practice goes on. Hindi tama na mamigay, kasi kapag nanalo, babawiin din ito, baka mas malaki pa. Dai, magkakaigwa nin korapto. Mali, kasi parang binibili ang pagkatao mo.
While a handful will never accept money, most participants say they will accept but still vote for those they like as long as there is no way their votes could be checked.
IPC concluded that, as suggested by the views and opinions expressed by the participants of the study, it is clear that the poor possess a dignified, defensible and rational idea about good leadership. However, the study said, there appears to be a mismatch between the ideals of leadership on one hand, and elections as the mechanism for choosing elected leaders, on the other.
Here is an important lesson that needs to be recognized. If the electoral process is fair and the broader political system is reformed, the poor, despite their poverty—can make good choices. But, as it is, the IPC study pointed out, they can only make good choices based on a flawed system. For our political problems, the voting poor (much used and abused) are not to blame.
I say, blame the miseducated and greedy elite, the unpoor who are in control.
My grudging vote. Eight out of 10 people I have asked have not made up their minds on who to vote for on Monday. Or are they just shy about their choices? Grudgingly, I vote on Monday for candidates I hardly care about. But vote I will, hoping my choice for president will grow bigger ears and a bigger heart for the extremely needy, and grow in wisdom and strength in order to right the wrong and be able to pull this country out of the shadows. We must now all pull together or perish.
Bring a list to the polling place. For the senatorial and council slates, list names in alphabetical order to make tallying easy.
Posts
