‘Mga Mukhang Adik’: The Impact of Criticizing Physical Appearance in Philippine Politics

Wazzup Pilipinas!?

"Nowadays, many Filipino voters choose candidates mostly based on how they look, without looking into their backgrounds or qualifications. This often leads to bullying of candidates who may not be conventionally attractive, even though they could be great leaders. This shows a problem where people focus on appearances instead of important qualities like skills and honesty."

"But it's the lowest level of campaigning if you focus on the physical appearances and not on the capabilities and integrity of the candidates."

"Very irrelevant remarks! This is what happens when politics becomes circus..Some good people seemingly lose integrity when joining the politics."

"Mudslinging, an old tactic. However, did he state anything regarding his plans and platform for his constituents? That is the one that should be highlighted in order to know if they have any plans for their territory. Dapat dun tayo sa may matinong plano! Dapat masabi nila kung anong problema ng kanilang kinasasakupan! Kung may thesis defense bago maka-graduate, dapat ganun din tayo sa kanila."

"This is his level of discourse? What is your platform of government? What have you done so far? Puro pamimintas lang ang alam ninyo. So ikaw, guwapo? Kaya dapat kang iboto? The more I will not vote for you. You are an empty shell."

"Politics change people or is it the people who change politics. Remarks like these may it be hyperbole or just a joke to make people laugh is not funny. If you want to be funny, work in a comedy bar not in government service."

"Cheap kind of campaigning, talk about your achievements/ plan and programs."

"This is not a good example of a leader.. pang display lang pala siya, walang laman ang ulo? Meron pala kundi hangin..if we cannot speak nicely to a person, we have a problem."

"Bonus na lang po sir if maganda physical attributes, mas mahalaga po character, integrity at past performance."

Recently, a viral video on social media showed actor-turned-politician Alfred Vargas allegedly mocking the physical appearance of his political rivals in the upcoming elections. The incident sparked various reactions from the public and entertainment industry figures.

Public and Celebrity Reactions

A well-known showbiz insider and talent manager expressed his shock over the video. In a Facebook post, he shared the footage of Vargas standing on stage with his supporters and fellow candidates. According to a report, the showbiz writer seemed surprised at Vargas’ behavior during the campaign. 

The Culture of Criticizing Physical Appearance in Politics

This incident sheds light on a deeper issue in Philippine politics—where a candidate’s physical looks often become a topic of discussion rather than their platforms and qualifications. A study conducted by the Institute for Political and Electoral Reform in 1995 found that Filipino voters tend to be influenced by personal traits rather than concrete plans and policies. 

The Impact on Voter Decisions

Such a campaign strategy can mislead voters into focusing on trivial aspects of a candidate rather than assessing their competence, integrity, and accomplishments. When attention is diverted to appearance rather than leadership skills, it increases the chances of electing officials based solely on popularity instead of capability.

A Call for More Meaningful Discourse

Many citizens are calling for a more substantial and issue-based discussion during election campaigns. Instead of attacking their rivals’ physical features, candidates should focus on presenting concrete plans and solutions for their constituents. This approach not only respects voters but also helps them make informed decisions based on a candidate’s actual qualifications and leadership potential.

Conclusion

The controversy surrounding Alfred Vargas serves as a reminder that politics should not be a platform for mockery and personal attacks. Instead, it should encourage meaningful discussions about national and local issues and how candidates plan to address them. Voters are urged to be more discerning and prioritize policies and competence over superficial qualities, ensuring that elected leaders are truly capable of serving the people.

The Impact of "Takaw-Mata" on Food Waste

Wazzup Pilipinas!?

In the Philippines, food waste is a pressing issue. A 2024 report by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) revealed that Filipino households generate approximately 2.95 million tonnes of food waste annually, equating to about 26 kilograms per person. This figure, while a decrease from previous years, still underscores the substantial amount of food being discarded.​

Rice, the nation's staple food, exemplifies the consequences of "takaw-mata." The Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice) reported that Filipinos waste around P7.2 billion worth of rice each year. This wastage is often due to individuals serving more rice than they can consume, especially during events where an abundance of food is available. Such practices not only lead to economic losses but also exacerbate food insecurity, as the wasted rice could have fed approximately 2.5 million people annually. ​

Personal Reflection: A "Takaw-Mata" Experience

Consider a scenario where you visit a popular supermarket and are enticed by the sight of a large New York-style bacon and mushroom pizza. Despite knowing your appetite, you purchase the entire pizza, consuming only two slices and storing the rest. Alongside, you buy roasted chicken and a pack of six sizable blueberry muffins, anticipating future meals. The following day, still satiated from the previous night's indulgence, you find yourself uninterested in the leftovers. This situation exemplifies "takaw-mata," where the allure of food leads to over-purchasing and potential waste.

Strategies to Combat "Takaw-Mata" and Reduce Food Waste

Addressing the "takaw-mata" mentality requires conscious efforts and practical measures:

Mindful Portioning: Serve food in modest amounts, allowing for additional servings if still hungry. This practice helps prevent plate waste and encourages mindful eating.

Proper Food Storage: 

Store leftovers correctly to maintain freshness and extend shelf life, making it more likely they will be consumed later.

Creative Use of Leftovers: 

Transform surplus food into new dishes. For instance, leftover roasted chicken can be repurposed into sandwiches, salads, or soups.

Educational Campaigns: 

Support initiatives that raise awareness about the implications of food waste and promote responsible consumption. PhilRice, for example, advocates for serving half-cup portions of rice to minimize waste.

Policy Support: 

Encourage policies that address food wastage, such as legislation promoting smaller serving sizes in restaurants or programs facilitating the donation of excess food to those in need.

Conclusion

The "takaw-mata" phenomenon highlights the broader issue of food waste in the Philippines. By adopting mindful consumption habits, proper food management, and supporting educational and policy initiatives, individuals can play a pivotal role in reducing food waste. This collective effort not only conserves resources and saves money but also addresses food insecurity, ensuring that the food on our tables fulfills its ultimate purpose—nourishing people.

The Growing Accountability of Social Media Personalities: A Deep Dive into the Tricomm Hearings

Wazzup Pilipinas!?

In an era where social media dictates much of public discourse, content creators—vloggers, bloggers, influencers, and other digital personalities—find themselves at the center of controversy. The ongoing Tricomm hearings highlight a critical issue: the spread of misinformation and the accountability of those who propagate it, whether intentionally or not.

The Thin Line Between Content and Misinformation

Many social media personalities have been labeled as purveyors of “fake news.” However, the emphasis on “daw” (allegedly) is crucial because accusations do not always equate to guilt. Authorities, such as Torre of CIDG, have been leveraging their power to file cases against those deemed as misinformation spreaders. Yet, the failure of some of these content creators to appear before the hearings raises suspicions—does noncompliance imply guilt, or is it simply fear of confrontation?

The purpose of the Tricomm hearings extends beyond merely identifying and prosecuting alleged fake news peddlers. It aims to set precedents for digital responsibility. However, when social media figures continuously evade invitations, subpoenas, or show-cause orders, they inadvertently fuel perceptions of guilt rather than innocence.

Social Media Personas vs. Reality

One of the more intriguing aspects of these hearings is the stark contrast between online personas and real-life personalities. Many of those summoned exhibit a vastly different demeanor in person compared to the bold, unfiltered versions of themselves that they project online. This phenomenon highlights a fundamental truth: social media is often a stage where content creators act out roles rather than express their genuine selves.

Social media thrives on passion—sometimes exaggerated passion. Just as mainstream media employs clickbait headlines and sensationalized reporting, digital personalities also craft their content with a mix of creativity and drama to capture attention. Whether for clout, entertainment, or visibility, social media is a competitive space where standing out is a necessity. Filipinos, known for their appetite for dramatic and controversial content, consume social media narratives much like they devour teleseryes—fast, emotionally, and often without skepticism.

The Challenge of Accountability

A key debate emerging from the Tricomm hearings is whether those who simply share potentially misleading content should be held legally responsible. While some argue that individuals cannot be blamed for their gullibility, authorities and legal experts assert that there is inherent accountability in sharing unverified information. The argument is that misinformation does not spread on its own—it gains traction through shares and engagements.

This puts social media users in a precarious position. While it may seem unfair to penalize those who unknowingly share false information, the reality is that ignorance does not always absolve responsibility. The safest approach? Conduct thorough research before sharing any content. If proof is lacking, adding disclaimers or captions can mitigate risks and prevent the unintentional spread of falsehoods.

Moving Forward: Responsible Content Creation and Sharing

The Tricomm hearings serve as a wake-up call for both content creators and consumers. While social media will always have a space for creativity and sensationalism, ethical responsibility should not be disregarded. The digital landscape is evolving, and with it, the need for accountability grows stronger.

For content creators, maintaining credibility is key. Sensationalism may attract views, but misinformation can have real-world consequences. For consumers, vigilance is equally essential. Before hitting that share button, a simple fact-check can make all the difference. In the end, the responsibility of truth rests on both the creators and the audience.

While at the Tricomm hearing, I try my best to reiterate that self-regulation works and that government regulation could be necessary, but we cannot fully control the eventual outcomes considering the state of our existing government regulations that are still full of flaws just as similar to the behaviours of our fellow socmed personalities especially when passion, advocacy, survival and greed intertwine with varying percentages of influence..

It will also be very difficult to express our creativity if we are constantly being dragged by the reminder that we are being monitored. Most of us could be guilty of going overboard but not all should struggle with the thought that we will be punished at anytime we make a mistake, especially if unintentional. We all know that if another person will be our judge, he or she may be prone to his or her own personal biases. Regulations, like every similar tasks out there, could only be good from the start but eventually would also turn out as another source of bureaucratic corruption, manipulation and control.