The person with the most information is the most powerful person in the world. That was a quote I learned back in high school, and it inspired me to pursue Computer Science. With that in mind—and now working as the Tech Head of my organization—I have access to various databases within the company due to the nature of my role. This means I hold information that influences decision-making and strategic planning. While this doesn’t make me the most powerful person in the company, having access to such information places me in a position where I can influence different individuals within the organization.

Simply put, the power of information can be manifested positively or negatively depending on who possesses it and how they handle it. Information is a piece of data that needs to be communicated in order to have an impact. On its own, it is not harmful. The effects stem from how it is communicated and the intentions behind its communication. Returning to my own example, if I use the information I process to create reports and graphs that help management make strategic decisions, then the power of information is being used positively. However, if I use the same information—obtained from within the company and its stakeholders—for personal gain, such as starting a competing organization and undermining my current company, that would be unethical and an example of how information can be negatively manifested.

There are also real-world examples that show how the power of information can be expressed in both positive and negative ways. On the positive side, researchers today are continuously expanding their knowledge of quantum computing. Quantum computing itself is a form of information. The theories surrounding how it works and how it could transform our lives represent valuable information that can be used to enhance society. The more we know, the more we understand—and the better outcomes our experiments can produce, ultimately leading to a more advanced and efficient way of living. On the negative side, however, the same power of information can lead to harmful consequences. While information in itself is neutral, the way it is communicated matters. The spread of fake news or misinformation, for example, demonstrates how false or misleading information can rapidly circulate across communities. When controversial ideas are built on groundless information, they can lead people to believe in non-factual claims, resulting in poor decisions and a decline in critical thinking. In the end, the power of information rests not only in what we know, but in how responsibly we choose to use it.

Given the profound notion that communication and information serve as the central force holding everything together—and acknowledging that not all things are created equal—their manifestations, whether positive or negative, are inherently relative and deeply shaped by context. After all, it is context itself that defines what is considered positive and what is deemed negative.

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), for instance, is often seen as a fundamentally positive manifestation of communication and information—encouraging organizations, whether voluntarily or through regulation, to give back to the society from which they benefit. However, scholarly discussions highlight that this concept is not without its complexities, as it can sometimes be misunderstood or misapplied. Even well-intentioned initiatives can be perceived differently, depending on how they are framed and communicated. This brings to mind something I frequently remind my students during class discussions: "Sometimes, it's not just what you say, but how you say it." In the context of CSR—and communication in general—the way something is expressed can profoundly influence its meaning, intent, and impact. But what, then, shapes this context? Is it something inherent to the message itself? To begin unpacking this idea, I firmly believe that power and politics play a dominant role in shaping communicative contexts—contexts that are often constructed through prevailing narratives, institutional agendas, and societal norms. This imbalance contributes to unequal access to resources and, in today’s Information Age, results in significant information gaps or digital divide particularly in developing countries. What’s particularly striking is that many people fail to recognize how deeply these dynamics—rooted in power, politics, and communication—affect broader social structures and, in turn, influence nearly every aspect of our daily lives. I recall a moment during a PTA conference at our school when the principal addressed the parents and made a revealing comment. He stated that some people are meant to remain fishermen, farmers, vendors, or housewives, while others are destined to become professionals. Based on this view, he suggested that if students show no interest in school, parents should stop encouraging them and simply let them be. In this instance, his perspective reflected an administrative context—one where minimizing student issues, such as absenteeism or unmet requirements, would ease the burden on school management. When leaders like school principals—who hold positions of authority—prioritize administrative convenience, it may indeed offer practical benefits for both themselves and the teaching staff. However, this approach also carries a deeper risk: it can reinforce long-standing social hierarchies rather than challenge them. By discouraging students from pursuing education beyond their immediate circumstances, such a mindset ultimately undermines the core goal of 21st-century education, which is to empower individuals and promote meaningful inclusion.

Considering the influence of information and communication shows that their effects—whether they uplift or constrain—are always determined by the context in which they occur. From well-meaning initiatives like Corporate Social Responsibility to the everyday messages conveyed within educational settings, the way information is framed, delivered, and sustained can profoundly influence societal structures. Power plays a central role in shaping dominant narratives, often resulting in unequal access to information. In schools, this can either reinforce existing social hierarchies or serve as a catalyst for personal and collective growth. Ultimately, the significance and effect of information—whether it becomes a tool of advantage or disadvantage—depend not solely on the message itself, but on the broader context in which it is embedded.

As a proverb popularized by Spider Man “great power comes great responsibility!” In today’s hyper-connected world, the power of information is undeniably vast and multifaceted. It functions as a core element that drives change, influences decisions, and shapes both personal and collective realities.

From my understanding of the readings in our textbook “ICT4D: Information and Communication Technologies: Global Perspectives, Asian Initiatives,” and Zoom class discussions, I have come to see information not just as a tool for communication but as something much deeper and more essential. It is fundamental in shaping and sustaining ecosystems, institutions, and societies. One insight that struck me was Prof. Flor’s idea that information acts as the “negative of entropy.” This concept helped me realize that information is not just about data or messages; it is also about maintaining order and direction in a world constantly facing complexity and potential chaos. How we perceive, process, and disseminate information directly affects the structure and health of communities, industries, and mental states. This perspective gave me a new appreciation for the critical role that information plays in maintaining functional systems and helping communities grow and thrive.

From a personal standpoint, I have experienced both empowering and destructive capabilities of information. On the positive side, the digital age has revolutionized education, allowing me to conveniently access a wealth of knowledge as a post-graduate student. Online libraries, forums, and e-learning platforms offer real-time updates and new learning methods, which have enhanced my academic journey. Businesses and industries also benefit, as ICTs enable better decision making, market reach, and automation. However, this power comes with risk. When distorted, the information can be misled or manipulated. The rise of fake news, algorithm-driven content, and online toxicity disproportionately impacts individuals who lack digital literacy, often the grassroots. I have seen how unchecked online posts, whether personal rants or emotionally charged reactions, can harm reputations and relationships. Furthermore, today’s youth face growing mental health concerns due to the persistent influence of social media, as the emotional triggers and comparisons inherent in these platforms blur reality and create psychological strain.

In summary, information is indeed powerful, but its impact, whether constructive or detrimental, depends on how it is perceived, understood, and applied. As discussed at COMM360 Zoom meetings, information must be approached with discernment and ethical responsibility. Technology magnifies this power, and as digital citizens, we are called upon not only to embrace its benefits but also to be mindful of its implications. Information can be enlightened and empowered, but without critical thinking and responsible communication, it can be disrupted and degraded. The choice of how we wield this power ultimately defines our progress as that of both individuals and society.

Information plays a vital part in our daily lives especially in our interaction. Not only our relationships are affected but also how we live since it governs how we see life, the world and ourselves. Through this, many innovation has help our lives easier like the birth of computers where routinary task has been passed to machine for them to perform. Recently the emergence of AI is the result of collective knowledge and information which helps not only in education but mostly in our various task. The negative result would the over used of AI would lead to dependency to it that would hinder development and critical thinking. Another is the assurance that the information being given is correct. There is still a need to validate and to ensure that we still know how to do things.

You all are writing rather about mass ainformation. What is the peculiarities of these both states of information? I've wrote a book about it: "Basics of the Theory of Mass Information. 50 main ideas". Now it is in a printing house, if anibody wants I can sent it by email. It is my 7th monograph.

As we are in the fourth industrial revolution, we cannot deny the fact that we have rich information sources, and its production and dissemination is being intensified by Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and the internet. Information is here, there, and everywhere, and it swiftly reaches those with access to digital resources. Without a doubt, information is powerful and we use it in our everyday lives. When people make sense of certain ‘information’, interpret it according to their existing consciousness, combined with their experiences, information transforms into knowledge that becomes our basis on how we decide, act, and behave.

Indeed, information is powerful and it can be used both positively and negatively to influence people. It is something that can inform and persuade us, depending on how we decipher it. Information is positively manifested by promoting various advocacies that talk about societal development—a call for action—encouraging and engaging stakeholders to partake in attaining progress in education, agriculture, environment, health, and equality, among others. Moreover, it is through information that people become aware of what’s happening, and this makes us decide on how to respond to situations. For one, when we receive information, mobile alerts, or weather reports from media and responsible agencies (e.g., Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration [PAGASA]), we prepare for the storm; farmers are harvesting in advance what they can save from their crops; people are securing their homes and pets; and some are evacuating because they are instructed by the government to do so. Thus, information is instrumental in saving lives.

For instance, when someone goes missing and information about this circulates online, there is a big chance that this person will be found and reunited with his or her family. Also, if someone needs financial assistance due to a severe health problem, and a post about this on social media becomes viral, this particular information calls people to send their help. Meaning, these kinds of situations foster a collaborative online community towards helping and uplifting one another.

On the other hand, information is negatively manifested when people are spreading rumors and fake news, which creates confusion, and when receivers diffuse this kind of message, it may cause others to believe in that piece of information, which, if not weighed and processed carefully, would lead them to accept it as their reality. Since the national election in the Philippines is nearing, many trolls are transmitting disinformation and they maximize the use of digital platforms like social media. This is one of their strategies to adversely influence and mislead people who are actively engaged online, which is why it is important for receivers to assess what type of information they should take or accept. Is the information based on facts or just used as attacks on political candidates? We should be wise enough to verify messages we encounter in our daily routine, especially that state election has something to do with the development of the nation.

When invented stories circulate online and people are convinced by them and give their one-sided comments and opinions, it can totally damage a person’s or organization's reputation. You cannot omit what has already been circulated virtually because, in the first place, the harm has been inflicted, and whatever impacts it caused on the subject are irreversible (e.g., tarnish organizational image and credibility, affect mental health, etc.), and there are those who collect and store this kind of information.

In cases of emergencies, distorted and false information can cause panic, fear, and confusion. Just recently, it was reported that a student in a university was burned and died in a fire, and this was because of allegedly wrong information and assumptions.

In a nutshell, information can be utilized positively and negatively, and it is powerful because it has the ability to influence our perceptions and actions, but people are more powerful when information is used appropriately and optimistically to uplift each other.

In today’s world, there is no easier way to track the power of information than through the internet.

The internet has made obvious how the power of information manifests both positively and negatively.

On the positive side, information dissemination has become easier and more targeted. It is very easy to learn about things online. It is also very easy to connect with other people to form communities.

While these are ostensibly good things, they can also be negatives. While it is easy to learn things online, be it an announcement or an instructional video, it is also easy to post false things online because hiding behind a screen can make repercussions and accountability seem far removed. Progress via the democratisation of information via the internet presupposes that creators have good intentions and the audience has good comprehensive skills, but a cursory search on any social media platform will show that this is not the case. While, for the most part, a majority of content creators are sincere the small number of malicious creators are enough to cause a lot of damage to society.

An example would be the last two Philippine presidential elections, where social media influencers and troll farms were allegedly used to convince the majority of the Filipino public to vote a certain way, a playbook that has allegedly been copied by other nations, particularly the US.

While this is alarming, it does not have to move along this trajectory forever. Information is in constant negotiation, which is why a thriving society is never stagnant, and a stagnant society is in danger of being prone to change from outside sources.

As we learned in class, information is the antidote to entropy. We have to remember that the internet is fairly new, less than a century old, and that we are still in the process of discovering how to interact amongst ourselves within it.

Meanwhile, while the dawn of the digital age predicted the demise of analog media such as videotapes, CDs, cassettes, and magazines, the rise of capitalism’s role in dictating what stays and is erased online has generated a growing interest in analog media as a means of archiving. And despite its ubiquitousness, the unreliability of the internet in the Philippines has not taken away the importance of traditional media such as radio and tv when it comes to information dissemination, especially during times of disaster.

The power of information continues to manifest in different ways, both positive and negative, with the uninformed tending to ascribe morality to its method of delivery based on its outcomes. But information is neither good nor bad, and should be regarded as important and handled ethically. Those that do not understand the importance of information and cognitive thought are those who are most at risk of being held sway by narratives that do not serve them.

Let me directly address the question from the context of the long-standing realities of the marginal fishers and farmers and the new gig economy, and the emerging BPO (Business Process Outsourcing) industries. With the evolution of an era where access to information is power, those who hold it consequently hold economic power. In today’s data-driven world, the power of information is shaping who thrives and who merely survives. Even without research data, one can just make a picture of how the marginalized farmers and fishers are positioned at the other end of the polarized dichotomy of the power of information, while the industries formed in the gig economy such as the BPO industries, are at the other positive end.

Those on the frontline of the food production, the marginal fishers and farmers, remain among the most disadvantaged in this information economy. Their daily struggles are compounded by climate change, market volatility, and a lack of timely, relevant information. Let alone know market rates, optimal planting or fishing seasons, or weather forecasts that could affect their efforts. There may be other contributing factors to these problems but one of which is their limited access to information, which is a longstanding issue among communication scholars on the digital divide. I have heard firsthand information about these issues from the marginalized fishers themselves in Zamboanga Peninsula. Their understanding of the rationale of the fishing ban varies, which leads to how they comply with the LGU mandates about it. In contrast to this phenomenon of the marginalized fishers and farmers are the booming BPO and those under the marketing industries. They have easy access to large databases for targeted marketing and these fuel these industries with more profit. Real-time access to consumer behavior (and with social media, they have the power to shape these behaviors) and market analytics are among the kinds of information they have at their disposal to grow the industry.

It does not take a genius to draw the contributing factor to such polarization, the digital divide. From what may seem to be just a technical issue lie deeper socio-economic implications for the affected families. Unless our society can identify the root causes of the digital divide and effectively make interventions to address it, the gap between the two industries will continue to grow, and we will continue to see that information serve as a tool of exclusion rather than empowerment. The real challenge isn't the absence of information; it's the unequal distribution of it.

The power of information can be observed in its positive and negative aspects, especially in the Philippines' dynamic virtual community. From basic principles of communication studies, such as verifiability, accuracy, credibility, and utility, information ought to improve public welfare, facilitate understanding, and facilitate democratic participation. However, the realities of the digital age highlight that information can both empower and inflict harm.

On the positive side, the Philippines has also seen the use of information as a way to unite communities, improve citizens' education, and improve access to information. A case in point is when the Philippine government published a comic book titled "The Stories of Teacher Jun" to counter Chinese disinformation on territorial claims in the South China Sea. The action uses simple language and images to educate the public on the Philippines' stand on the matter, to reach the youth. Moreover, the creation of the Philippine Disinformation Resource Hub (Disinfo Hub) by a group of Filipino researchers ahead of the 2025 elections is a clear-cut instance of an active response to countering and curbing the spread of false news.

The adverse aspects of the power of information are apparent in the nation's ongoing battle with misinformation and disinformation, particularly on social media platforms. The forthcoming midterm elections have revealed the susceptibility of the information landscape to orchestrated disinformation efforts. False narratives are often spread through networks of fake accounts and click farms, distorting historical truths, targeting journalists, and manipulating public opinion.

The spread of fake news compromises the principles of verifiability and credibility, resulting in public confusion and a decline in trust towards institutions. A significant case is the “Polvoron video,” a deepfake that inaccurately portrayed President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. engaging in drug-related activities. Even though it was debunked by government bodies and independent fact-checkers, the video gained considerable attention online, highlighting the difficulties in controlling the dissemination of manipulated material.

The experience in the Philippines illustrates the double-edged nature of information power. While it can be used to educate and empower, it can also be manipulated to deceive and create division. I believe that adhering to the principles of communication science—ensuring information is precise, credible, and verifiable—is essential for successfully navigating the intricacies of the digital information environment. Strengthening media literacy, advocating for transparency, and encouraging critical involvement are vital actions to alleviate the negative impacts of disinformation.

As a language instructor at North Eastern Mindanao State University in Caraga Region, I’ve seen firsthand how powerful information can be—both in empowering communities and in causing harm. Exploring the "First Principles" of information and communication science has helped me better understand and appreciate how information functions in society. According to what I have read in the book ICT4D: Information and Communication Technologies: Global Perspectives, Asian Initiatives, information is a resource, a message that reduces uncertainty, and a difference that can make a difference. These principles are not just theoretical; they are visible in our daily lives, especially in how we teach, learn, and interact in a digital world.

On the positive side, the power of information is clearly manifested through access to education, health updates, and development programs. In our region, students benefit from online learning materials, while farmers and fishermen can receive timely weather updates and market prices. These examples show how information serves as a resource that can help improve livelihoods. They show how ICTs can be harnessed for development (ICT4D), allowing communities to bridge gaps in knowledge, access services, and participate more actively in civic life. When information is used ethically and effectively, it can lead to empowerment, especially in underdeveloped and rural areas like ours.

However, information also has a darker side. Misinformation and disinformation spread rapidly on social media, often leading to confusion, fear, and mistrust. I’ve observed some of my students and even colleagues struggling to distinguish credible sources from fake news, which affects how they form opinions and make decisions. This reflects a failure to use information to reduce uncertainty. As educators, we now face the responsibility of not only teaching communication skills but also fostering critical thinking and media literacy. We must guide students to become responsible consumers and producers of information, so they can use it for truth, understanding, and positive social change—not for manipulation or harm.

Information, undoubtedly, is one of the most powerful forces to shape human and human behaviors. The exponential growth of digital technology and the internet even made information accessible in a time faster than anyone could have ever imagined. To say that information is inherently positive or negative is vague but saying that it is both and dual in nature is more real in a sense. Depending on how it is utilized, its force may empower or destruct.

In today’s world, information is power. It is a force- it moves, triggers, and push people to act, to impact, and to effect. Whether or not it is geared towards the positive or the negative, it solely depends on the motive and the intent. It depends on which side of the fence are you situated in and what intent moves you to spread the information for.

The power of information is double edged. It may connect or divide. It may shape or strain. It may liberate or confine. It may create or destroy. The challenge lies not in restraining it but in shaping the systems that govern its creation, spread or dissemination and use. As in to always benefit the human dignity and bring forth truth at all times and at all costs.

Greetings. Very interesting thoughts. I am the author of the monograph "Fundamentals of Mass Information Theory. 50 Basic Ideas". Do you work deeply in this field?

The Double-Edged Sword: How Information Empowers and Endangers Us

We live in an age where information is power. Like any form of power, it can be used to increase or decrease, to enlighten or to manipulate. The positive and negative manifestations of information are not just theoretical, they shape our daily lives, our political systems, and even our mental health.

On the bright side, information has made knowledge more accessible than at any other point in history. You can learn a new language, watch live footage from space, or look up symptoms before going to the doctor, all from a simple smartphone that fits in your pocket. This kind of access empowers people. It democratizes education, supports civic participation, and connects progresses across borders. The Arab Spring, for instance, was fueled by the power of shared information, and so are grassroots climate campaigns and real-time fact-checking. In short, good information in the right hands can drive progress.

But there is a darker side to it. Information can also mislead, confuse, or divide. Misinformation and disinformation now spread faster than facts. Social media algorithms, designed to optimize engagement, often promote sensationalism over accuracy. We have seen how false information can fuel vaccine hesitancy during the pandemic, polarize societies, and even incite violence. And it is not just about what is untrue, but also what is withheld. When governments or corporations control access to information, like in China and Russia, they control the narrative. That is a subtle but dangerous form of power.

The psychological toll is another issue. Being constantly bombarded with news, much of it negative or conflicting, can leave people feeling anxious, helpless, or numb. Information overload is real. Having “everything” at your fingertips does not mean you can process it all, and without media literacy, the flood of data becomes more disorienting than empowering. So, is information good or bad? It is neither, because it is a tool. And like any tool, its impact depends on how we use it and who controls it.

The challenge today is not just to access more information, but to cultivate discernment, demand transparency, and use what we know responsibly. That is the real test of living in the Information Age.

Brilliant ideas. Have you a monograph about this matter"

The impacts of an information society are profound. Whether it is societal demands that give rise to technological advances or the increasing technology that is shaping society, in a time where everything around us is rapidly changing, the modern man, both as a creator and consumer of new information is faced with great challenges to adapt to the rising demands of the information society.

The information society is set to revolutionize the way we accomplish most tasks but may not form one unified social model. Society has always been drawn towards different sources of information; getting to this information has sometimes proved to be a daunting task, as there have been time and space obstacles. That resulted into high costs of transportation and a backlog of procedures. Presently, with the highly networked system, one need not leave the comfort of their home. Information travels through networks linking people together, from a stable geographical location through their computers.

In today’s information society, man is more informed than ever before as he is given the opportunity to access innumerable amounts of data. The massive amounts of information that surround us daily, hold us superficially and not substantially aware of reality.

The protection of our privacy is another extremely important issue that needs to be considered. Through the information society, an overload of negative data, can turn into a destructive social factor if it is uncontrollably used. Unfortunately, people appear to be unable to harness the new upcoming information age, since their countermeasures seem insufficient.

We cannot put a blind eye to the information society and everything has its good and bad sides. However, we live in a time where information is a ubiquitous part of life. The pressing issues of today-global warming, pandemics, globalization, political reformations and discoveries in science and medicine requires one to be an informed citizen because information will enhance individual citizens, which will in turn benefit society as a whole. To conclude, there are greater benefits through information society rather than drawbacks to individuals and society alike.

Debate: Journal Editors Do Not Need To Worry About Preventing Misinformation From Being Spread

"The 18th General Assembly and Conference of the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) was held in Oslo, Norway on May 14-16, 2025. The event’s final session was a debate, where Haseeb Irfanullah argued in favor of a motion declaring that journal editors do not need to worry about preventing the spread of misinformation, while Are Brean argued against it. This article is based on that debate...

However, there is one important difference: Scientists are generally more literate and trained in critical reading than the general audience. And science editors are even more so. We are highly trained in looking through academic fog and expert lingo, recognizing spin, half lies and lies based on both good and bad science, exposing biases and not taking assertions at face value. After all; these are the skills we hone every day at work. Therefore; if there is one group that should excel in recognizing misinformation in science, it is science editors. Misinformation is one of the major threats to modern society. For the sake of our common future, every citizen has an obligation to fight it. In my opinion, the most highly skilled among us have the strongest obligation. We, the science editors, are not only advocates of science; we are also among the most highly skilled in recognizing when science is misused. Therefore, we need to worry the most about misinformation being spread."

https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2025/06/24/debate-journal-editors-do-not-need-to-worry-about-preventing-misinformation-from-being-spread/?informz=1&nbd=&nbd_source=informz

https://ease.org.uk/ease-events/18th-ease-conference/18th-ease-conference-scientific-programme/18th-ease-conference-session-12/

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391841800_EASE_Conf_2025_Debate_Haseeb_Irfanullah_16May25

To be able to answer this question, principles gleaned from my readings indicate that information is a tangible/intangible thing or object, while communication is a process, and to manage entropy (disorder, disorganization), one communicates information. The more information is communicated, the higher the level or state of certainty is. Now, whether that certainty may be positive or not is another thing altogether, and information itself, may be thought of as amorphous, neither inherently good or bad, and it is up to the one able who discovers or receives that information to wield it for good or bad. Hence, the one who wields information has great power, and thus, (as a famous Marvel character has said) great responsibility as well. Next, we must clarify what "power of information" means. When we refer to power of information, we must also acknowledge that information has influence, it can forge opinions, decisions, behaviors, institutions, and societies. The power of information can have positive manifestations (good outcomes) or negative manifestations (harmful outcomes).

Nowhere is this more evident than in the recent political events that have happened thus far in Asia. The first is the South Korean crisis wherein former President Yoon Suk Yeol had unilaterally declared Martial Law despite intense opposition, which culminated in a political crisis, when lawmakers stormed the parliament building to convene and unanimously reject the Marial Law declaration. The second is the Thai political crisis involving then-Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra and leaked conversations with another government official regarding the Thai-Cambodia border issue. The third is the Indonesian protests against proposed housing subsidy increases for parliament members that culminated in nation-wide rallies. The fourth is the Nepalese protests, which came about due to government corruption and repression. Finally, there is the ongoing issue in the Philippines, which are connected to the alleged corruption, mismanagement, and irregularities, pertaining to allotted flood control budgets for Philippine provinces, wherein billions of pesos where found to have been allegedly released for projects that were either non-existent ("ghost projects"), incomplete or substandard, with a lot of government officials accused of corruption/collusion with contractors. This also culminated in nationwide protests in September 2025. What all these share is the power of information. In each one, information (the (in)tangible thing) was the crux or catalyst that led to the series of events that would follow: alleged bribery/corruption (in South Korea's case, that of First Lady Kim Keon-Hee, Indonesia, Philippines, Nepal), alleged election-related fraud and geopolitical controversies (vote-buying, fraud, mishandling of the Thai-Cambodia border crisis, in the case of Thailand), unsatisfactory programs and policies (be it economic, political, etc.as in the case of budget cuts in South Korea, and Nepal's repressive social media policies) and overall dissatisfaction with government and leadership for all the Asian countries involved.

As can be seen here, these countries have been thrust into uncertainty by their leaderships and administrations. This uncertainty have led these countries into possible disorder. Information (disclosed, leaked, etc.) communicated to citizens increased certainty that their leaderships and current administrations may be lacking, which in turn provided them with the impetus to take the necessary next steps. This happened in South Korea, wherein information led to the ouster and arrest of its president, and installation of a new leader, in Thailand, where leaked information led to the suspension and removal of the prime minister. While both were relatively peaceful, this would not be the case in Indonesia, where the disclosure of information led to increasingly violent protests that has led to the death of a delivery rider, a few other individuals, and destruction to property. However, the Indonesian protests did achieve something else that (according to The Guardian at least), was rare for the Indonesian government: not proceeding with the planned increase in lawmaker perks (housing allowance and overseas trips) that sparked the protests in the first place, and thus restoring a modicum of order. The protests in Nepal had turned deadly, but it had also resulted in the resignation of its prime minister, and the election of an interim prime minister, one that was notably (and interestingly), "elected" via a Discord server. As for the Philippines, Senate investigations are under way, with some government engineers being sacked, contractor companies removed/blacklisted, and government offices/officials and lawmakers implicated. The hearings are still ongoing. Nation-wide protests in major cities/provinces were conducted. All of these could be considered positive manifestations of the power of information - the protests that have led to the change in leadership. The negative manifestation, as can also be seen above, could be seen in the violence that could easily erupt from peaceful protests, and the removal of leaders, both of which could temporarily destabilize a country, and which, again, would spell a brief uncertainty for the country.

As can be seen above, the power of information has shaped how people from the different countries (officials, ordinary citizens) acted/reacted to the news of corruption, program/policy changes, fraud, etc. which ultimately led to the protests. However, while discussions on the first principles of information posit that information negates uncertainty, the specific examples above though seem to demonstrate that (disclosed/leaked) information, doesn't immediately lead to certainty, but rather to confirmation (suspicions of fraud, corruption, etc. for example), which then lead to protests, which are also a manifestation of disorder, and more uncertainty. Thus, there seems to a period of disorder and uncertainty after information is disclosed, after which, once whatever issue has been resolved (whether through peaceful or more aggressive means), transitions to a period of (relative or interim) order before equilibrium is achieved. It is also interesting to note that at the point at which information (about corruption, fraud, etc.) are revealed, there also seems to be a brief period right before the protests and before equilibrium is achieved, in which the possibility for both certainty and uncertainty can happen (something akin to the Schrodinger's cat situation - in which, until the next course of events unfold, both possibilities for certainty and uncertainty can simultaneously exist).

I would also like to point out that, as in the case of the Philippines, these corruption and other allegations are nothing new. In fact, they are familiar narratives in the history of the country that date back to the Martial Law years. Time and time again, information has revealed corruption, human rights abuses, and other incidences misconduct among government officials. While these have had the positive manifestation of mobilizing people to fight for social change and install leaders that might improve the country, it also seems as if there is a seemingly endless cycle of corruption that the certainty of information (voter literacy, for example) cannot eliminate. Moreover, the advent of the internet and social media has indicated that though information is more readily available that could fight and prevent corruption and fraud, and thus lead to more certainty, the very same internet and social media have also led to misinformation and disinformation - to mislead and thus bring us to more uncertainty. It should also be noted that social media and the algorithms that now govern our feeds have turned into a kind of algorithmic colonialism (as SA Prof. Emma Rutkamp-Bloem has pointed out) and I would say, algorithmic imperialism, in which information is harnessed for corporate gain/interests rather than the betterment of humanity - again, a negative manifestation of the power of information. Facebook, for example, has staunchly refused to be regulated, claiming they are only a third-party platform hosting information (including fake news) and thus are not liable/accountable for issues pertaining to election fraud (as in the case of the first Trump presidential election controversy, and the alleged 2016 Philippine election issue) and other real-world effects of people posting on the platform. Facebook and other social media have also had issues with transparency (especially in terms of disclosure about how user data is being used). Thus, accountability and transparency may be thought of as another negative manifestation of the power of information.

To conclude thus, the power of information can be influential. It shapes opinions, decisions, behaviors, institutions, and societies, for better (positive outcomes) or for worse (negative outcomes).