Watchful Eyes on SINGAPORE’s Blogsphere; Website’s Owners & Editors Criminally Liable for Content; PM Lee H L Interview: What must change in S'pore?
But others, such as "Mr Wang Says So" (mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com) and independent filmmaker Martyn See's "No Political Films Please, We're Singaporeans" (www.singaporerebel.blogspot.com), take on hard social and political issues. It's still altogether unclear what direction the Internet revolution will take in
The Singaporean authorities have been stealthier in their tactics. Some of
Many wondered whether 2006 would see a replay, or worse, of that experience, particularly considering the more recent proliferation of politically oriented websites and blogs. Last April, Lee Boon Yang, the minister for information, communication and the arts, fired a warning shot at all Singapore bloggers when he told the semi-official Straits Times: "To help bring some order to this chaotic environment, we have made it a requirement for political parties and individuals who use websites to propagate or promote political issues to register with the MDA."
A few weeks later, electioneering began in earnest, but rather than self-censor their content, bloggers' political coverage increased. The boldest ones were those that had been set up specifically for election coverage, but in defiance of the MDA had anonymously hosted their sites abroad. Notably, the MDA did not force any site to register during the election season, and some interpreted the inaction as a tacit government admission that it was left with few options against a rising tide.
Anti-government sentiments. The political content on many blogs was overwhelmingly anti-government, a fact recognized by People's Action Party (PAP) politicians after the elections, which, as usual, the party swept in resounding fashion. "I know that something has gone wrong when more than 85% [of the bloggers] write negatively about the PAP," ruling-party member of Parliament Denise Phua told a public forum. The government should figure out how to "manage this channel of communication", she added, a remark that itself brought down a ton of digital bricks on her head. Two months later, optimism about freedom of speech over the Internet would be tempered. The government objected strenuously to a column written by a well-known blogger, "Mr Brown", published in a print daily newspaper, in which it was alleged that the government had withheld adverse economic data from the public until after the elections.
The newspaper promptly ditched "Mr Brown" from his regular column. Bloggers saw that as heavy-handed punishment for controversial postings in the blogosphere. Media observers such as Associate Professor Cherian George of
The Singaporean government does not pre-censor the media, but simply makes sure that editors have a keen sense of what should and should not be reported when doing their jobs. Much of the character of reporting and commentary in The Straits Times or the various television channels run by government-owned Mediacorp can be explained by self-censorship. The same leverage has also been applied to the leading foreign titles. Last August, Time magazine, Newsweek, the International Herald Tribune and The Financial Times were each required to post a S$200,000 (US$131,000) deposit and appoint a legal representative in
The publication is currently being sued for an article it published about opposition politician Chee Soon Juan in mid-2006. In fact, the MDA's regulations provide for similar means of control over websites and blogs. If required to register, a website's owners and editors are criminally liable for any content that the government finds objectionable. As Sintercom discovered during its final phase of abortive negotiations with the government in 2001, when it tried to get the state to spell out clearly what it considered objectionable, the powers that be refused. As with the mainstream media, they wanted Sintercom's editors to make their own judgment, with the government reserving the right to punish them after the fact. However, the dispersed nature of the blogosphere makes enforcement less than cost-effective.
It would mean going after numerous sites, each able to pop up again anonymously after being shut down. As the election period demonstrated, there is already widespread discontent with the government among political commentators on the Web, and this would only be inflamed by any official attempt at a crackdown. But these calculations can change over time, as has been proved over history. Should an issue become critical enough for the government, such as the growing disparity between the rich and the poor, it may be worth the political price to invoke draconian regulations or file suits against a handful of consistently critical blogs. Likewise, should any blog get a large readership, the government could likewise be tempted to intervene.
Measurable impact
As it is, the impact of the Internet has become quite measurable. In a recent survey of younger Singaporeans aged between 15 and 29 - that is, the generation with the highest average Internet use - the Singapore Polytechnic's
The director of the same school, V Maheantharan, concurred. "But I'm not surprised, because they are under so much more different influences than what I went through. They've got 100 movie channels and they've got the Internet." That is provided that the government does not step in. As it is, the authorities have maintained their arsenal of laws and regulations aimed at curtailing critical political commentary, even if they have so far used them only sparingly. Hence it remains possible that should any website develop into a digital newspaper dependent on commercial revenue and run by paid editors, the government would likely apply the same squeeze as it has on the traditional press.
Thus freedom on
Alex Au is an independent social and political commentator, freelance writer and blogger based in
= = == = == = == = = === = ==from asiaone.com.sg
Tom Plate INTERVIEWS Singapore PM Lee Hsien Loong; CHANGES to be Competitive with Dynamism to make Singapore Conducive for Business & to Stay
What must change in S'pore
[*Tom Plate, former editor of the Los Angeles Times editorial pages and a longtime journalist with New York and Time, has taught in the Communication Studies Department at UCLA since 1996]
Tom Plate: Every time I come to
Mr Lee: The economy must continue to change. That means it has to be competitive and must grow and we must have the vibrancy and the dynamism to continue to reinvent ourselves, which means taxes have to come down, especially direct taxes. It means skilled talent has to be here. We have to educate our people, and to attract talent here. That means the whole business environment has to be favourable so that people come here and say this is where I want to live, this is where I want my business to be and I can do the business of business, which is to make money and the place can prosper. I think that's one major priority.
The second one is education: to develop our people so that they are prepared for this brave new world. We have quite a good system. I think it needs to be further improved, both in the content of the schools and institutions which are there, and also beyond that so that people continue to be educated and learn, even into their working careers, more systematically and in a more flexible sort of way, because you can't quite decide exactly what are the skills needed for the future. If I train you as an engineer, you can do a lot of things but if I just train you to do a particular job and the world changes - the Chinese come along and do that better and cheaper, well, what will you do?
So you have to learn to be flexible and our schools must get people into that mindset to know how to do this and to be prepared for this sort of world. That's a big thing. Thirdly, if you're looking at 10, 15 years, social cohesion is an important issue because with our incomes stretching out like everywhere else, you must make sure that the people who are at the lower end feel that they have something in this, they have a stake in this. We talk about free markets and free trade and it's the only way we can prosper - through free markets and free trade. But if free markets and free trade lead to half the population with stagnating incomes, which is what's happened in
* And in
In
Our education system is a big help too, but in addition to that, we've just introduced what we call Workfare in our Budget last week, which is our form of what you call an Earned Income Tax Credit, but with not so much in cash. A big chunk of that goes into the Central Provident Fund savings for the future, for their pension, for their medical, for their housing. But basically it's still a transfer and I think it's something necessary to do. So, that's the third thing if you're looking at 10, 15 years. If you are looking beyond that, then the population is an issue. Procreation in young people, immigration and integrating the arrivals as well as the births, so that you have a cosmopolitan but cohesive and stable society. That's the challenge.
* Not much you can do about it?
You can make yourself attractive to people to come from the rest of the world - which we are doing and we are bringing big numbers in. We have about 35,000 births a year. We actually would like 50,000 births a year. We have about 30,000 people take permanent residence every year, almost as many as are born here. Of course, not all of them become citizens, maybe only 12,000 a year. Even that is not small in terms of needing to settle them and integrate them into our society and not have them become an enclave or a ghetto, or a separate group that generates new social problems. That you can do something about. Babies, well, we can encourage couples to have more, but we haven't been very successful.
* Very few governments have done that.
The French have not done badly.
* ...What are two or three things in this region that you'd like to see changed so that in 10, 15 years it is easier for Singapore to be Singapore?
Security is one issue - terrorism and terrorist groups which are in the region continue to be a threat. We're concerned about that, and I think so are the other governments although it's not easy to deal with. Whether it is
* You know, in
We're talking about the Asean Charter, and working towards signing it this year. We're talking about Asean Community 2015. We say Asean will have two wings,
Thirdly, we would like to see
* Right. How do we handle this?
The
* I think the totality of that point that you made, I mean the sweep of that, is enormous - and I think it's often missed in the
Yeah. It used to be that the
In
* Ten years ago when interviewing your father, then your government's Senior Minister, I asked him for one piece of advice to take back to
Ten years ago would have been 1997, would have been Bill Clinton midway through his first term by which time he had learnt...he was gradually convinced and did the right thing, and George W. Bush after a rocky start has also been doing the right thing. Bush is quite clear on
He knows that he needs to develop a constructive relationship, even if you don't call it a partnership across the Pacific. So I think that's good. But whether he can maintain that in the face of popular pressure and whether the next President can sustain that remains to be seen because when you had CNOOC bidding for Unocal, there was an emotional and irrational reaction in the
* Absolutely. That ended the collaboration right there?
Yes.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home