Background: In June 2025, DOH reported a 500% rise in new HIV cases and called for a national public health emergency. The news coverage sparked considerable engagement on Facebook, where Filipinos are among the world’s most active users. Clinical research and surveys have documented HIV-related stigma, but the general public’s sentiments regarding HIV news online is less characterized. Facebook comment sections on news articles capture reactions and narratives that formal instruments may miss. They reach audiences far beyond those targeted by health campaigns, making them spaces where misconceptions can circulate unchecked. This study aimed to describe the public sentiment and narratives on HIV in high engagement Facebook posts, what harmful narratives they shared, and what questions they raised, in order to support communicators on what gaps they can address.
Methods: We analyzed public comments on HIV-related Facebook posts by major Philippine news outlets and the Department of Health (DOH). The sample covered 11 posts from June 2–28, 2025, when DOH released new HIV case data and called for a national public health emergency. Seven posts from August to December 2025 served as a comparison. We extracted up to 30 top “Most-relevant” comments per post, sorted for a total of 501 comments. Two coders applied a codebook adapted from HIV stigma frameworks. The codebook covered content type, misinformation type, stigma target, and sentiment. Moral judgments were further sub-coded by the reason for blame: sexual identity, sexual conduct, religion or sin, social decay, or recklessness. Quotes are paraphrased composites, and no commenter identifiers are reported.
Results: June comments clustered around three narratives. First, many comments blamed LGBTQ+ people and sexual immorality for the rise in cases. Nearly half of June comments were stigmatizing or hostile, and LGBTQ+ people were the most frequent target (51%). Sexual identity was the leading reason for blame in June (42% of moral judgments), while from August to December, blame shifted toward sexual conduct (55%), such as infidelity, casual sex and paid sex. In this sample, supportive and corrective comments were outnumbered about 3 to 1. Second, COVID and vaccine conspiracies spilled over into HIV discussions, as they mocked vaccines and health institutions with coined terms (“bakulam,” “World Hell Organization”), with some spelled to evade moderation. Finally, commenters questioned both the motives behind health services and how to access them. They asked why the government funds PrEP and free treatment, and what the health emergency sought to achieve. They also asked where to test for free, whether medicines are free, and how to get PrEP.
Conclusions: News of rising cases gave old stories new life: the blame on LGBTQ+ people and COVID-era distrust on health systems. The questions and concerns are answerable. Newsrooms and DOH pages can respond by reporting numbers with context and people, prebunking COVID and vaccine-related claims, and emphasizing resources and explainers.
Keywords: HIV/AIDS, social listening, content analysis, stigma, Philippines