Broadcast error fuels Philippine poll fraud claims
"God Comelec! It's Atty.Vic's name but Bam's face?" reads a Facebook post shared May 13, 2025, referring to candidate Vic Rodriguez and newly elected Senator Bam Aquino.
"Did you swap their votes? You panicked while switching votes so you made this mistake?"
The post includes a news graphic titled: "Bilang Pilipino 2025 Senatorial Race". It depicts votes received by six Senate bets.
However, the pictures and names do not match. The candidate ranked first, for example, has incumbent Senator Christopher Go's photo but is labelled Willie Revillame.
Similar posts rocketed across Facebook and TikTok a day after the archipelago nation's mid-term vote, which was largely defined by the explosive feud between President Ferdinand Marcos and impeached Vice President Sara Duterte (archived link).
The dozen senators chosen nationally will form half the jury in Duterte's July trial that could see her permanently barred from public office (archived link).
Comments on the posts indicate some people believed the graphic was proof Comelec rigged the votes.
"Comelec's deception busted," one reads.
Another says "Garcia must be held accountable," referring to poll body chairman George Garcia.
A keyword search on Google for "Bilang Pilipino 2025" found the faulty graphic in News5's live election night broadcast on Facebook (archived link).
AFP reviewed the original segment before it was edited out of the larger live stream. According to the anchors, the graphic showed unofficial results, with 58.89 percent of votes transmitted.
Local media ABS-CBN and GMA News also aired the results around the same time. The top six candidates and their corresponding votes are consistent with the pictures and tallies in News5's graphic (archived here and here).
News5 has since apologised for the name mix-up, which it attributed to a "graphics error".
"For a few seconds at around 9:15 p.m., we showed a tally of the partial, unofficial results for the senatorial contest that had the correct ranking and photos of candidates. The names, however, did not match," the broadcaster said in a Facebook statement published May 15 (archived link).
"Measures will be taken so that this does not happen again."
AFP has debunked more election-related misinformation in the Philippines here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
40 minutes ago
- Forbes
BLS Data White Men's Employment Opportunities Declining In Recent Months
White men's employment opportunities have declined. Monthly unemployment data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) show that white men have seen a worse erosion of employment opportunities than white women and Black men, in the recent labor force decline. White men's unemployment rate has risen faster and their employment rate has fallen more than was the case for their counterparts since January 2025, when Donald Trump took office. This disproportionate weakness of the labor market for white men is likely due to troubles associated with Trump's economic policy chaos in sectors where many white men work. The unemployment rate for white men 16 years old and older has risen faster since January 2025 than for some comparable groups. The overall unemployment rate for people 16 years old and older rose by 0.2 pct. pt. from 4.0% in January 2025 to 4.2% in May 2025. White men's unemployment grew from 3.4% to 4.0% during that time — a 0.6 pct. pt. increase. This is slightly smaller than the jump of 0.5 pct. pt. for White men 20 years old and older that the BLS reports in its monthly data tables, but it does not distract from the overall point that white men's unemployment rate has increased. Moreover, the BLS reports the overall unemployment for people 16 years old and older, making this the proper comparison group for white men and other population groups here. For example, the unemployment rate for white women 16 years old and older fell slightly by 0.1 pct. from 3.7% to 3.6% and the unemployment rate for Black men dropped by 1.4 pct. pt. from 7.1% to 5.7% during the same period. Black men still have a harder time to find a job than is the case for white men. But, their opportunities to find a new jobs have improved, while they worsened for white men. Changes in the unemployment rates for white men reflect fewer employment opportunities. Calculations based on the BLS' Current Population Survey (CPS) further show that the employment-to-population ratio for white men has fallen by 0.7 pct. pt. from 65.6% in January 2025 to 64.9% in May 2025. This may not seem much, but using the relevant employment numbers and employment-to-population ratios for January and May 2025, a simple calculation shows that there were 716,000 fewer employed white men than would have been if the employment-to-population ratio has stayed at the same level in May 2025 as it was in January 2025. In comparison, the employment-to-population rate for white women 16 years old and older declined by less – 0.3 pct. pt. from 54.7% to 54.4% — while the one for Black men actually increased by 0.5 pct. pt. from 60.9% in January 2025 to 61.4% in May 2025. In combination with rising unemployment rates, the faster drop of the employment-to-population ratio for white men suggests that their employment opportunities have declined. Declining employment for white people is often associated with an aging population. This requires breaking down the data by age groups. Averaging over four-month periods is necessary here since not all publicly available BLS data series broken down by age are seasonally adjusted. The unemployment rate for white men overall was 0.2 pct. pt. higher from February to May 2025 than in the prior four months – from October 2024 to January 2025. Comparing the same time periods for white men between the ages of 25 and 54 years old – so-called prime earnings years – shows no change in the unemployment rate, but an increase of 0.2 pct. pt. in the unemployment rate for white men aged 55 to 64 years old. That would suggest more problems for older White men, just as the population is aging. Yet, aging alone cannot explain the challenges that white men face. The same calculations for white women show that the unemployment rate for prime age women – from 25 years to 54 years – fell by 0.5 percentage points from an average of 3.8% to an average rate of 3.3% during the same time periods. The opportunities for finding a job have increased for white women in their prime earnings years, while those for white men have stayed the same. Other explanations for the declining employment opportunities for white men could lie in troubles in some industries that employ more white men than white women, for example. Data from the BLS' Current Employment Statistics (CES) show that manufacturing employment, which tends to be male dominated according to the CPS, has gradually decline in recent months. In a similar vein, transportation employment, such as trucking — another male-dominated industry, according to the CPS. It is also possible that white men's employment in some parts of the financial service industry such as commercial banking, which has been flat for about year, could have been hurt, although financial services are about equally split between men and women, based on data from the CPS. The declining employment opportunities for many white men follow to some degree from the chaotic economic policies of the Trump administration. The sectoral changes go along with a slowing economy which has followed from heightened economic uncertainty. In particular, more uncertainty leads people to pull back on spending for durable goods such as cars. And, it has kept interest rates high, making taking out loans less attractive for people and businesses. Unlike in previous times, a slowing economy this time around more impacts white men more negatively than women or Black men.
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
Trump on China Trade Talks: ‘Not Easy'
00:00 We are doing. Well with China. China's not easy. Just like. Just like here. Your home country is not easy there. I think we're doing very well there. Over there now. I'm only getting good reports. It's a little early, but they'll be calling in soon. In fact, probably when I get back, I'll have my first call from them. We want to open up China. And if we don't open up China, maybe we won't do anything. But we want to open up China and it'll be a great thing for China, a great thing for the rest of the world. To lift export controls when it comes to China, did you give your negotiators any sort of limitation to say, look, China has been ripping off the United States for many years. Nobody charged them $0.10. No president had the courage to charge China for whatever reason. They didn't want to do it. I took in hundreds of billions of dollars. I put on tariffs on China when I got in first term and we took in hundreds of billions of dollars. And then I did it again. But I did it for a lot of others. You look at the stats. The deficit last month was cut in half. Everybody was shocked. I wasn't shocked. I think a lot of the people at this table weren't because they saw the billions of dollars that were pouring in and the tariffs hadn't even started yet. Just about there weren't cars. They were in some countries at a very minor level. And we cut the deficit in half. And it was a big story a couple of days ago. They said, I don't believe one of the announcers on a business network went wild, said, I can't believe these numbers. Those numbers are good. The numbers are going to be very good. I think we're going to have a great four years.
Forbes
4 hours ago
- Forbes
White House Unveils $1,000 ‘Trump Savings Accounts' Baby Bonuses: What To Know
A group of high-profile CEOs joined President Donald Trump at the White House on Monday to showcase a proposed investment account program, named after the president, for newborn children. Trump officially announced the 'Trump savings accounts' at a Monday afternoon roundtable alongside Dell CEO Michael Dell, Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon and Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi, deeming it one of the 'most important' components of his second term. The Trump savings accounts are a component of Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' which passed the House of Representatives last month. The proposal calls for the Treasury Department to fund $1,000 in investment accounts for children born in the U.S. between Jan. 1, 2025 and Jan. 1, 2029. Newborn children will be automatically enrolled in the program. Parents or other account custodians can place up to an additional $5,000 in post-tax contributions annually into the accounts, which will be invested in index funds tracking the broader U.S. stock market. The account beneficiary will be able to withdraw up to 50% of their balance beginning at age 18. That person will then have access to the full balance beginning at age 25 for qualified purposes, including small business loans and higher education, before gaining full control of the entire balance at 30 for any use. The Trump savings accounts will require post-tax contributions and tax withdrawals as either long-term capital gains or normal federal income, unlike the tax-free qualified disbursements from 529 higher education and Roth IRA retirement accounts. The 'Trump savings accounts' were previously known as 'Money Accounts for Growth and Advancement' or 'MAGA Accounts,' a nod to Trump's 'Make America Great Again' slogan, before Republican lawmakers in the House renamed them just before passing the bill. $5,590. That's how much a $1,000 investment in the SPDR S&P 500 exchanged traded fund trust ($SPY) made June 9, 2007 – exactly 18 years ago – would be worth today, according to FactSet data, including reinvested dividends. That same investment made 31 years ago would be worth $22,770. The Trump savings accounts would cost taxpayers $3.6 billion in its current form of a government-funded $1,000 starting balance, based on the 3.6 million births in 2023, the most recent data from the National Center for Health Statistics. But Trump claimed Monday the government contributions would come at 'absolutely no cost' to taxpayers as it would be carved out from 'Big Beautiful Bill' initiatives including a 3.5% remittance tax on money sent abroad. The Trump savings accounts are 'not very attractive' for parents or other custodians to invest in, Alpha Financial Advisors CEO Ann Reilley told Yahoo Finance, adding it 'seems' like the Trump administration is 'complicating things for no reason.' Financial experts' skepticism of the program being the best place for parents to park money for their children beyond the $1,000 freebie stems from its comparatively limited tax benefits compared to 529 college savings and Roth IRA retirement accounts. The Trump savings accounts going into law are contingent on the Senate passing the 'Big Beautiful Bill,' which became increasingly murky as fiscal hawks like Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., raised concerns about projections of a swelling national debt under the package.
