at a time when social media has transformed politics from policy to performance, the emergence of latter-day political personalities provides the public insights into how performativity underpins modern political behav-ior—and how that behavior in turn resonates with the aspirations of a younger generation steeped in digital culture.

The modern-day spectacle is characterized by crowd-drawing antics and meme-inflected social media cam-paigns that invite a question. How much of what we see is substance, and how much is performance?

Originating in philosophy and social theory, performativity refers to how individuals enact a role, not simply reflect it. In the context of politics today, this means public figures don’t just govern—they stage. They “show up” for an audience, craft a persona, curate visuals, and manage moments that will play well in media feeds. The result: a politics less about purposive deliberation and more about visibility, movement, crowd optics, crisis moments, and rapid-fire content.

Today’s social media-savvy politicos stage live events that are filmed, posted, reshared, and commented on. The performance becomes the evidence of power. As one columnist put it, they position themselves as “being a thorn to the powers that be.”

So why does this posturing matter now? It’s simply because we are living in a social media era where atten-tion is the currency, and the members of Generation Z, or those born after 1995, consume politics through screens, reels, TikTok, tweets, and livestreams. The traditional gatekeepers, such as media, political parties, and community networks, are being bypassed or ignored.

For younger voters, authenticity means showing up and getting noticed. The questions of the day persist: “Did (s)he respond to the chat? Did (s)he drop that meme? Was the livestream real or staged?” The boundary between performance and policy blurs.

Moreover, performativity alters the incentives for politicians. Instead of being recognized for having done long-term planning, extensive research, and sustained community work, they are rewarded for being “present in the moment.”

Thus, they purposefully plan and execute “performativity moments,” such as a viral instant rally, a tweet storm, a hashtag, a theatrical stand-up in the House of Representatives, or a conspicuous attention-getting stunt in a public square. These are all calculated to elicit applause from crowds, virtually or physically. When the share count in social media ticks up, such performance moments are thereby validated.

In that sense, we may ask: Is our politics being reshaped by spectacle? And if so, what are the implications for governance?

For Gen Z voters, whose patience for status-quo promises is understandably low, performative politics pro-vides a fresh outlook: a younger face, a different tone, a crowd-powered energy. For those who are buoyed by a vision of a major transformation, there is ample scope for hope that the 2028 national elections could bring about meaningful change.

Hence, it becomes imperative to cultivate a more mature perspective that eschews the promotion of image over the propagation of substance. If, indeed, performativity is inexorably determined by the nature of social media, then there must be heightened caution against allowing it to become the end goal, rather than the pro-jection of the means by which today’s political leaders deliver concrete and tangible services to their constitu-ents.

For media professionals like us at the Manila Bulletin, it is worth pondering and reflecting on how our cov-erage of current events should respond to the new imperatives brought on by the emergence of performativity. Do we treat and measure the relevance of public officials by their ultimate accountability to the sovereign peo-ple? We are leaning toward this new norm.

Performativity is not a reason to lighten scrutiny but to sharpen it. Acknowledging that someone orches-trates the crowd doesn’t relieve us of the responsibility of ascertaining the ultimate impact upon the wellbeing of the mass audience or the populace.

For those who belong to Gen Z, the stakes are personal. They live in a world of short-form content, instant social validation, and fleeting trends. When their politics becomes performative, they set into motion a cycle of reaction rather than deliberation.

The audience may applaud the spectacle, or share the moment, but will they ask the deeper questions, such as: What has changed? Will the infrastructure improve? Will corruption be reduced? Will schools and hospitals function better?

On the flip side, performativity also offers opportunity. Elected representatives, as well as senior officials in the civil service, who are sufficiently savvy in social media can bring new voices, new topics, and new energy into the realm of political discourse. If such is matched with genuine service, then this might usher in a new politics of substance.

In the age of performativity, the stage is set, but the real work remains backstage. For Gen Z, and for all of us, the challenge is to ensure that in the end, good governance is not just what appears in the feed. It is about meaningful changes that transform people’s lives.

Comments may be sent to [email protected]