AS SEEN ON TV
My 2010 post mort
A highly politicized year comes to a close. Now we take stock of learnings:
Poll automation is fast, too fast for cheats to catch up. That’s why desperate moves to block proclamation of winners can only be possible via violence and other delaying theatrics in the counting. For instance, Iloilo had a mini people power and Bacolod had hair pulling episodes. Good for TV, bad for decency. This also confirms most of the election “operations” are in the provinces where counting has been stalled particularly in the local races, to the detriment of some national candidates whose wins were also put on hold by local bickering. “Operations” were also largely contained to vote buying more than the usual padding and shaving. Or it isn’t?
Voter sizes per precinct should be reduced. A precinct size of 350 voters could be more ideal than 1,000 per clustered precinct. To encourage more people to vote, the process must be made easy. The long lines at the polling precincts resulted in low “turn out”, high “turn off” factor. Then again, this is the first automated elections in the Philippines hence it’s a learning experience for everyone. When Comelec brought in the IT experts, it left out crowd control professionals. Lines could be more orderly and lining up, more pleasant. This is an election, not Auschwitz Birkenau which by the way is the place where the one who simulated and concluded 1,000 voters per precinct is a “walk in the park”, should be gassed.
Vote buying will not always result in a win. Bad news to traditional politicians and believers of “cash is king”, the voters cannot be indebted for a few hundred bucks. Track record is still the best way for politicians to pay supporters back at the end of the day. Track record is also responsible for the downfall of many candidates who’s had bad associations and a history they couldn’t be proud of. Realistically, it takes a quarter of a century for Filipinos to forgive and forget, based on the Marcos experience.
Concessions were one of this election’s best features. I was amazed watching candidates concede one by one on national TV, a humble sign that we are growing up as politicians and electorate. Hats off to Gibo, Villar, Gordon and several other candidates for throwing the towel. But on the day they conceded, some candidates still cried “dinaya ako!” which is the battlecry of the politically immature, conceited and undignified. “Dinaya ako” is even inaccurate and incredulous in the age of automated polls. The expression itself must be left in 1986 where it belongs. For gone in the annals of history are fraud-prone manual elections. Get modern, get real!
The youth and new media are forces as powerful as private armies. The youth vote and youth participation thru social networking sites have bolstered vigilance during the elections. New media also helped shape public opinion before elections. Facebook killed more candidates than any other private army in the country. Sites like Twitter increased awareness that part of a successful, honest and clean elections, is vigilance. The nation watched!
True colors show via debates. Live debates have helped people make decisions by hearing impromptu answers to controversial questions and arguments. Voters would not have spotted stupidity, ignorance and lack of substance if candidates had their way with unchallenged, well-written speeches alone. Debates made voters see candidates in the raw (and those too raw for public positions).
To see new faces in the Senate, avoid voting for old ones (unless they’re really worthy). The results in the senatorial races came as a shock to many. The old ones still clinched the top 12 seats and barely a new face will grace the house in the next 3 years despite a number of good choices in senatorial candidates. Why? By voting for the popular ones, we mathematically limit the permutations for the new ones. If 5 voters voted for one popular candidate and one new candidate each, old candidate automatically gets 5 votes while the other 5 new candidates only get one vote, each. If you want a senate with new faces, then get an “all new” line up. And this can only be possible if voters really took time to get to know their candidates. If we vote purely by recall, the senate race will remain to be a popularity contest, where voters suffer from Last Face Syndrome.
Advertising sometimes does not pay. There is such a thing as “over saturation” in advertising and some candidates learned it the hard and costly way. Yes, one can have too much advertising that even the world’s brightest advertising minds believe that indiscriminate placement of commercials causes a dip in consumer demand. Just when people thought they’d heard enough of a campaign jingle strategists should have replaced the ad copy right away. Negative as it is, consumer irritation can translate into lost patronage or waning interest.
Election coverage can be made exciting. All this talk about hologram effect, touch screen and augmented reality has glued viewers to the networks for a highly-charged, ostentatiously-visual election monitoring experience. To the many critics of high-tech-ness of the election TV coverage, I respectfully disagree that elections should be broadcast traditionally (read: stiff anchor against the wall with straight graphics, poor lighting in a still life studio). Media is catering to a generation of viewers whose hunger for a more visually enticing viewing experience is insatiable. You’ve got to give it to the networks for putting a good, sensual show.
Artistas still rule. I don’t know if voters chose showbiz personalities for their leadership abilities or popularity. We can only hope that the choices were based on something more real and useful such as competence or even intelligence. It’s not to say that showbiz personalities and celebrities are not capable of public service but in real life, there are no special effects, camera tricks nor retakes.
In real life, people could die from poor judgment calls.
