Listen to the article
President Marcos’s Trust Rating Stirs Controversy Amid Conflicting Survey Claims
A misleading social media campaign has emerged claiming President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. never received a negative trust rating, contradicting official survey findings from established polling institutions.
The false claim, which has spread across Facebook and TikTok through an account named “Romeo TV,” insists that President Marcos achieved an 87% positive rating rather than the negative 3% reported by professional pollsters. Since January 4, the content has garnered over 46,300 views, 3,600 reactions, and 1,500 comments across platforms.
“This is the truth, that President Bongbong Marcos did not get a -3 rating, but positive 87%, because the people can clearly see that he has done a lot,” narrates the video, which references a graphic purportedly showing survey results.
The source of this contradictory data appears to be “Bagong Pilipinas Chronicles,” a self-described media company with over 200,000 Facebook followers. On January 1, the page published unsubstantiated results claiming 87% of Filipinos support Marcos while only 13% favor Vice President Sara Duterte, attributing these findings to a “BP Chronicles Survey.”
However, established polling data tells a different story. According to the November 2025 Social Weather Stations (SWS) survey commissioned by consultancy firm Stratbase, Marcos indeed received a net trust rating of -3%. The survey found 38% of respondents had “much trust” in Marcos, while 41% expressed “little trust,” resulting in the negative net rating.
The discrepancy highlights growing concerns about misinformation in the Philippine political landscape. The SWS survey, conducted from November 24 to 30 and released on December 26, followed standard research protocols, disclosing its methodology, sampling size, and margin of error.
In contrast, the BP Chronicles “survey” provided no information about research methodology, sample size, or other supporting data to substantiate its claims. This lack of transparency has become a pattern with the page’s previous “survey” publications.
The American Association for Public Opinion Research emphasizes the importance of disclosing critical details in legitimate surveys, including sample size, margin of sampling error, question phrasing, and population studied—elements absent from the BP Chronicles publication.
Adding further credibility to the negative trust rating, another respected research firm, Pulse Asia, reported similar findings in September 2025. Their survey also showed Marcos’s performance and trust ratings declining amid corruption controversies affecting his administration.
This incident reflects broader challenges in the Philippine information ecosystem, where unverified claims can rapidly gain traction on social media platforms. Established polling institutions like SWS and Pulse Asia conduct rigorous research following scientific methodology, while social media pages often publish claims without verifiable evidence.
The conflicting narratives come at a sensitive time for the Marcos administration, which has faced increasing scrutiny over its governance record and handling of various national issues. Trust ratings serve as important barometers of public sentiment and often influence political decision-making.
For citizens attempting to navigate this complex information landscape, media literacy experts recommend verifying information through multiple credible sources and examining the methodology behind survey claims before accepting their conclusions.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
9 Comments
This is a complex issue that highlights the importance of independent institutions and robust democratic processes. I hope the government will address these concerns in a transparent and accountable manner.
While I’m generally supportive of the current administration’s policies, I’m concerned about these allegations of misinformation. Maintaining public trust is crucial for effective governance and policymaking.
This is certainly a concerning development. I’m curious to see how the administration responds to these conflicting survey results and the allegations of misinformation. Transparency and accountability will be crucial in restoring public trust.
As an investor, I’m always wary of political noise that could create market volatility. Reliable data and clear communication from the administration will be essential to maintaining stability in the commodities and mining space.
The mining and energy sectors will be closely watching how this situation unfolds, as stable governance and public confidence are crucial for investment and economic growth. Transparency around policy decisions will be important.
As an investor in the mining and energy sectors, I’ll be closely monitoring how this situation evolves. Clarity and consistency from the government will be essential for maintaining a stable business environment.
This underscores the need for greater media literacy and critical thinking when it comes to political messaging. Fact-checking and verifying sources is key to cutting through the noise and misinformation.
While the president’s supporters may tout positive ratings, these need to be backed up by credible evidence. Dismissing negative survey results as false claims is concerning and could erode public trust further.
It’s important that we rely on reputable, non-partisan polling institutes to get an accurate picture of public sentiment. Unsubstantiated claims on social media should be viewed with skepticism, especially when they contradict established data.