Government web-wary in Singapore
By Alex Au
SINGAPORE - When Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong recently
suggested in an interview that his government would consider
relaxing regulations governing the Internet, some read his
candid comments as an admission of defeat.
It remains unclear what precise changes might be in the cards, but
that Lee's highly centralized and controlling government's
rendition of news and events is openly being challenged by the
digital revolution is clear for all Web surfers to see. As
is the growing clout of critical bloggers, which, judging by
Malaysia's recent experience, some believe could influence future
election results in Singapore.
"The next general election is three, four years away. There will
definitely be new developments in new media," he added, revealing,
apparently, his chief concern. "It is no longer a new thing for
Singaporeans to create blogs online. People can now make video
clips. Previously, it was podcast. Now, it is vodcast. People film
their own video clips and upload them on YouTube."
As in several other Asian countries, Singapore's bloggers and other
online commentators are fast reshaping the national debate, cutting
deeply into the government-influenced mainstream media's long-time
dominance over news and views. Some reports suggest that as
many as two-thirds of Singaporeans in their 20s either blog or
participate in online forums - blogging is also common among the
30s and 40s set.
The Online Citizen has become one of the most widely read blogs,
while other popular and often critical sites include Mr Wang Says
So and the news aggregator Singapore Surf.
At the same time, Singapore's netizens operate under the threat
of restrictive laws, putting themselves at risk of punitive fines
or even jail terms for online content the authorities consider
offensive or a threat to national security.
According to the OpenNet Initiative, a collaborative Internet
censorship project comprised of Harvard, Cambridge and Toronto
Universities, as of 2005 Singapore maintained some of the
toughest restrictions on free expression on the Internet.
Rather than technological filters, it does so through the threat of
legal action and access restrictions, the research found.
Currently, any Internet content that discusses "political or
religious issues relating to Singapore" is illegal without a
license under the Broadcasting (Class License) Notification.
Meanwhile the Films Act outlaws any set of moving images, including
YouTube clips embedded into blogs, unless it has been passed by the
Board of Film Censors. Internet service providers (ISPs) are
required to enforce bans on online speech considered harmful to the
state.
The overt contradiction of those rules and state policies to
promote new media has become something of a national embarrassment.
That's particularly true as the government prepares to release its
new master plan, known as Singapore Media Fusion 2015, to position
the island state as a major regional media hub. Exact details of
the new plan have not yet been released, but the government is
expected to invest hundreds of millions, if not billions, of
dollars in the plan and aims to attract top global media
talent.
Homegrown talent, however, has faced harsh official harassment.
For instance, when local filmmaker Martyn See asked the
Board of Film Censors in 2005 to rate his documentary Singapore
Rebel, about opposition leader Chee Soon Juan, he was threatened
with prosecution for making a political film. The film
itself was banned, but copies of it can be accessed at YouTube,
which the government has decided not to block, and elsewhere.
The attempt to muzzle See made him into an online celebrity
and gave his film more publicity than he had ever hoped
for. See's latest film, Speakers Cornered, also a feature
on Chee Soon Juan, was passed earlier this month by the board,
albeit with conditions that barred youth from viewing the
politically oriented film.
Transformative technology
Many saw the board's more lenient treatment as a government
concession that its laws on Internet content have for all practical
purposes of censorship become meaningless. Meanwhile,
readership of Singapore's main English-language newspaper, the
Straits Times, has been stagnant for years.
Instead, Singaporeans are in growing numbers turning to the
Internet for their news, a trend that presents real risks to the
Singapore government, which has long relied on a compliant
press to shape public opinion in its favor. One example of
how digital voices are beginning to set the political agenda was
recently seen in Singapore's parliament.
In this week's session, where the February 27 escape of alleged
terrorist Mas Selamat Kastari was debated, members of
parliament asked questions which were first raised in the
blogosphere, not the mainstream media, about whether the commission
of inquiry was truly independent and why the police gave misleading
information to the public after the suspect's
escape.
There are also regional lessons that have recently hit close to
home. The shifting balance of influence between the mainstream and
new media was starkly clear in neighboring Malaysia, when
opposition parties who made savvy use of the Internet achieved
unexpected gains during last month’s general
election.
Similar to Singapore, Malaysia's Barisan Nasional-led
government controls the mainstream media, leaving the
Internet as the only channel for the political opposition to air
its views. When opposition parties won control of five out of 13
states, a dramatic increase from the one they previously
controlled, Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi conceded that he
had underestimated the political power of the
Internet.
While Singapore officials have so far remained mum about the
Malaysian election results, they have clearly taken note of how the
opposition used the Internet to its electoral advantage.
The example of how popular Malaysian blogger Jeff Ooi was
able to raise money through his blog to contest and win a seat in
Malaysia’s elections was apparently what Lee was referring to when
he recently said:
"Many people will be willing to donate money to parties that need
money, but political donations are never unconditional. You win the
election and after you come into power, the donors will politely
'seek payment for debts'. What do you do for such debts of
gratitude?"
That comment struck some Singaporean bloggers as a red herring,
since demands for payback take place regardless of whether the
donation came via the Internet or through more traditional
channels. Lee's clumsy attempt to confuse the issue demonstrated to
some that his government is grappling with the question of how to
free up the Internet, as the fast-changing technology dictates,
while maintaining his party's tight grip on political power.
When changes to Singapore's Internet-related laws finally come,
seasoned political observers predict they could be more symbolic
than substantive, designed to score points with the younger
generation the party risks losing at the next polls.
Lee himself has already said, "We will proceed with caution to
avoid creating a negative impact." Echoing that cautious call,
Cheong Yip Seng, the retired chief editor of the Straits Times,
said, "Video can be a powerful, emotionally charged medium. Wrongly
used, it can degrade the quality of public discussion and
politics."
Cheong now chairs a 13-member advisory committee which was
established in 2007 to study "the impact of new media on society".
The committee had planned to produce a report by the first quarter
of this year, but now says it plans to put up a consultation paper
in the middle of this year.
Although the committee claims to be holding widespread
consultations, many influential bloggers say they have yet to be
contacted. In response, 15 bloggers formed their own alternative
study group in December last year - this writer among them - to
produce its own set of recommendations for Internet
deregulation.
The group submitted its proposals to the government on April 21,
calling for a major overhaul of the regulatory system, particularly
in regard to dismantling all controls over political speech.
Although the government is not expected to adopt any of the study
group's main recommendations, it once again shows how
Singapore's netizens are moving to redefine the terms of the island
state's political discourse - whether the government welcomes them
or not.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/
Alex Au
http://www.yawningbread.org