'I just write': Blogger Krizette Chu doesn't 'feel responsible' for posts

MANILA, Philippines — A Filipino blogger and prominent Duterte supporter with thousands of followers said she was uncomfortable with the idea of being held responsible for her posts because "she just writes what she feels.” 

During the House Tri-Committee’s third hearing on disinformation on Friday, March 21, Rep. Jude Acidre (Tingog Party-list) asked social media personality Krizette Laureta Chu about her influence online. 

Chu, who has over 250,000 Facebook followers, estimated that her posts receive an average of around 10,000 views each. She said her most-viewed political posts are “always about the former president,” referring to Rodrigo Duterte.

While she doesn’t identify herself as an “influencer,” Chu said she thinks her posts would trend “because it resonates with the people.”  

Acidre then asked: “How would you describe the extent of your influence online and what responsibility do you think comes with that influence?” 

Chu responded: “I am very — I am not comfy (comfortable) with the idea that I am responsible for something because I just write. As I said, I’m very careful.” She added that she simply writes what she thinks and feels. 

When Acidre then asked whether she acknowledges a “degree of responsibility” for her influence, feels any “weight of responsibility,” or considers how her “inflammatory statements” might affect others, Chu didn’t answer directly.

She repeatedly referenced her journalism background and training, saying she applies it to her posts to ensure that “no one can ever call her out” or label them as “fake news.”

When asked about her inflammatory statements — her own description of some of her posts — she defended them as personal opinions. 

“Those are my opinions, and I believe I have very intelligent readers. If they think I’m lying, they can call me out,” Chu said.

Who’s accountable for sharing unverified claims?

It was when Acidre cited a Facebook post by Chu that she made a clearer statement. The post was in relation to the rumors of mass resignation within the Philippine National Police (PNP), which has already been debunked.

In her post, Chu mentioned hearing rumors of police officers stepping down, using the Filipino word “daw” — a term that signals secondhand information, often without citing specific or credible sources.

Chu defended her post, arguing that the use of “daw” maintains the “truth,” even though she later said she did not have firsthand information on it. 

However, Acidre pointed out that she neither verified the claim nor corrected it after the PNP denied any mass resignation. At the same time, he said there is still a risk that some may take the rumor as truth — especially when it is repeated over and over again.  

Asked if she made any effort to rectify her post containing the rumor, Chu maintained that she did not phrase it as “news.” She also said she had not read the PNP’s statement until it was presented to her during the hearing.

The blogger then said her post was meant to express support for the police, urging them not to resign. She added that it reflected the “pulse of the masses” who were “afraid” upon hearing about the supposed resignations.

“You feel no responsibility whatsoever… You really don’t care what people will do or think after reading your post?” Acidre asked.  

“I do not feel any responsibility because my conscience is clear. It’s not phrased as news,” Chu said. She added that the PNP issuing a statement shows a “general sentiment.”   

When no one takes responsibility

However, the spread of such rumors or unverified claims, despite the absence of credible sources, often fuels and reinforces public sentiment.

Acidre said this reflects the “problem” with social media users who claim to follow journalistic standards yet do not adhere to the “canons of journalism.”

He compared them to radio commentators who, while expressing opinions, are still held accountable. 

The lawmaker noted that if broadcasters spread rumors that could threaten national security or cause public harm, their licenses with the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas (KBP) could be revoked.

Later, during an interpellation with Rep. Bienvenido Abante (Manila, 6th District), Chu said she would write about the PNP’s statement after hearing PNP Major General Nicolas Torre III clarify that no mass resignation had occurred and that the few resignations were also unrelated to Duterte’s arrest.

Acidre, however, moved to subpoena a digital copy of Chu's Facebook posts, which was seconded by the committee.

This is the first Tri-Committee hearing attended by several pro-Duterte vloggers, commentators and influencers after previously snubbing the last two hearings and attempting to halt the legislative inquiry through a Supreme Court petition for certiorari and prohibition.  

The probe seeks input from disinformation experts, fact-checking organizations, social media personalities and government agencies to develop a code of ethics and push platforms toward stronger self-regulation against false narratives online.

RELATED: After Duterte’s ICC arrest, more vloggers show up at House disinfo hearing