Philippines flood scam probe on livestream: Corruption unfolds in real time

Imagine this: corruption probes, like the one being conducted by the Indepedent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI) in Manila, livestreamed for the whole nation to see — would that change the game for the Philippines?

Would Filipino voters finally ditch the old-school tribal and dynastic politics, or just hit replay on the same drama?

Corruption in the Philippines isn’t just a glitch. It's culture. It runs deep.

Every election, people (especially in rural areas) expect money and sell their votes to the highest bidder.

It's a deal — the sale of one's dignity — made in hell.

Result: Post-elections, politicians grab their return on investment (ROI) through midnight-budget heists and a parade of “liar projects” (amounting to billions of dollars worth of "ghosts", apart from the substandard or abandoned ones).

Long term: Crumbling infrastructure, bad tourism numbers, poor jobs creation vs neighbouring nations, poorest-in- the-region economy.

This "anay" (termite) culture eats up the entire house until only the shell is left.

Filipino taxpayers end up feeding hungry crocodiles — except calling these crocs corrupt politicians insults the animal kingdom.

But few people knew this narrative prior to the era of livestreamed Senate hearings.

Livestreamed corruption probes, like the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee’s flood scam inquiry, have turned serious investigations into a prime-time show — creating a communication buzz that no textbook ever saw coming.

For one, it has heightened Filipino voters' perceptions of widespread government graft, while eroding trust in leaders.

They have widened calls for accountability.

Key surveys on public sentiment offer a glimpse into changing attitudes.

For example, Pulse Asia's September 2025 survey found 97% of Filipinos view government corruption as widespread, with 85% believing it worsened recently, coinciding with the probes' exposure of anomalies like ghost projects and kickbacks, or "tongpats".

Only 45% saw Senate inquiries as effective for truth-telling, lower than faith in protests (46%), signaling voter skepticism toward legislative probes despite their livestream visibility.​

An SWS survey highlighted eradicating graft as the top voter concern for 2025 elections, amplified by livestreamed hearings revealing multibillion-peso irregularities.

Marcos Jr.'s trust rating hit a record low post-probe revelations, with 90% suspecting collusion among officials, contractors, and lawmakers in flood fund misuse.​ Vice President Sara Duterte's approval ratings also tanked.

A 2017 survey experiment showed Filipinos often tolerate corrupt candidates if they hail from humble origins and show strong performance, explaining persistent support despite probes.

Earlier studies link corruption exposure to cautious news evaluation via social media, fostering voter wariness but not always shifting votes due to partisanship.

While no direct studies isolate livestreaming effects, probes fuel anti-corruption priorities without guaranteed electoral punishment.​

This newfound visibility sometimes leads to skepticism or distrust when the public perceives livestreams as curated or incomplete, or when transparency alone does not translate into meaningful institutional reform.

Among Filipino voters, livestreaming improves factual awareness and encourages active participation, but it does not automatically restore trust in institutions if underlying governance issues remain unaddressed.

The effectiveness of livestreaming depends on broader systemic changes.

No amount of digital transparency can take the place of genuine accountability.

This dynamic is particularly relevant amid high-profile corruption investigations, where viewers scrutinise government responses in real time, shaping public opinion on institutional effectiveness and integrity.

The younger generation, such as Gen Z voters, particularly values authenticity and openness demonstrated through such livestreams, making them more engaged and critical consumers of social content.

However, the risk of misinformation or manipulated narratives within livestreams is a concern that can affect trust negatively if not properly managed.

Livestreaming introduces a double-edged sword.

For Filipino voter to regain their trust in institutions, institutionalising transparency and engagement hold the key.

But this is easier said than done. While potentially increasing trust, it also exposes flaws.

Without the needed accountability reforms, it will only reinforce distrust, and heighten the dysfunction.

What impact could we expect?

It depends on the broader cultural context which shapes how citizens interpret and react to what they see in these digital public forums.​

But maybe, just maybe, shining a bright, unblinking livestream spotlight on the politician's midnight antics could jolt the nation awake.

Termites are photophobic and avoid light as much as possible.

With every "Juan" and "Juana" hooked to their smartphones these days, perhaps it would remind Filipinos that sunlight is the ultimate disinfectant.

Could seeing the corruption parade live on screen finally stir voters to take responsibility, demand change, and say enough to the endless cycle of graft?

Will this flood of public outrage wash away long-standing dynasties that have made elections their family business?

That’s the trillion-peso question.

That the next chapter for the Philippines might not be written by old alliances, but by a new wave of citizen power and fresh choices for the future.

Corruption's wound is so deep and raw, it’s been festering across generations like an open sore that refuses to heal.

Scams thrive in an atmosphere of darkness. Livestreamed probes are today's equivalent of "Ghostbusters".

Exposing scams is one thing; ensuring they won't happen again is quite another.

The former is theatre; the latter needs real-life action. The former needs smartphones; the latter needs reforms.

The former is a tool; the latter is the product. The former provides the premise; the latter is the logical conclusion.