SINGAPORE: Gov’t Flip-flops on Media Regulation

By Stanislaus Jude Chan

SINGAPORE, Jan. 22 (AMF) — The verdict is out on Internet regulation in Singapore, but opinions vary on how it will affect the relatively freer space for public discussion on the web.

The state-controlled media trumpeted as a step forward the government’s approval this month of 17 out of 26 recommendations designed to regulate the Internet in the areas of political content, use by minors and engagement with the public.

Netizens, however, paint a grave picture and see these regulations as a death grip.

The film industry and the Internet look set to continue to suffer the brunt of the government’s whip, according to announcements over the media regulation last week.

It all began when the Advisory Council on the Impact of New Media on Society (AIMS), commissioned by the Singapore government in April 2007, released a consultation paper in 2008 to regulate the Internet.

In a nutshell, the study aimed to look into the impact of new media on society and to make recommendations on how best to address regulatory issues regarding the Internet.

On Jan. 9, the government vetoed one-third of the proposals, including the decriminalisation of films by political parties, the removal of a registration requirement for individuals and political parties in generating online political content, and greater leeway for civil servants to voice opinions.

When the AIMS released the paper, the sole dissenting voice came from a group of 13 Singaporean bloggers.

Dubbed ‘Bloggers 13’ by the mainstream media, the hastily formed group cobbled together a counter-proposal for the government to maintain a "light touch" in policing the Internet. But apart from an acknowledgement of receipt, the group has not heard back from the government, said Alex Au, one of the 13 bloggers.

Curiously, the government has also decided against engaging citizens outside of current government platforms, despite reports in ‘The Straits Times’ in February 2007 that the incumbent People’s Action Party (PAP) government would be “mounting a quiet counter-insurgency against its online critics”. PAP MP Baey Yam Keng had advised that “it was necessary for the PAP to have a voice in cyberspace as there were few in the online community who were pro-establishment”.

Responding to individual blogs and forum postings will require a huge amount of resources and is “extremely difficult”, said Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts Dr Lee Boon Yang. He likened this to “wandering the whole of the Internet just to debunk every single misleading or wrong posting”.

DOUBLE STANDARDS?

In spite of increased hype on citizen engagement, the government has elected to rely chiefly on its feedback unit, REACH, as its online source to engage young Netizens.

“Is the government going to say ‘no, we're going to ignore them because you didn't come into my room?’” said Alex Au, prominent Singaporean activist. “The government has to find ways of addressing some of the issues that are raised in other parts of the Internet, even if nobody brings it up within REACH. It could be in the form of a statement within REACH itself that addresses the stuff that is being talked about outside.”

Some six months after its high-profile launch graced by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, REACH’s Facebook group has just over 1,730 members and less than 160 discussion topics, even though the 4.6 million population of this city-state enjoys one of the highest household Internet access rates in the region.

Even as the government’s feedback arm seemingly struggles to attract citizens to discuss national policies on its platforms, lively discussion elsewhere will be curtailed.

Under the freshly spelled-out rules, Singaporeans will be required to register websites with political content with the authorities “to ensure accountability”. Further, those working in the civil service will also be given the gag order, and are barred from voicing any political opinions.

The government will also move to amend the Films Act over the next two months to allow for films by political parties that are factual and objective, and do not dramatise or present a distorted picture.

An independent advisory panel, to be chaired by Richard Magnus, a retired senior district judge and chairman of the Casino Regulatory Authority, will determine if political party films are allowed to be aired.

However, the Ministry for Information, Communications and the Arts (MICA) said it will retain its right to ban films that it finds are against public interest under Section 35 of the Films Act. Under Singapore law, the minister has the right to ban any film – without giving reasons for such action.

GIANT LEAP BACKWARD

Recognising the role of new media, the government had called for a harnessing of the free flow of information on the Internet during the 2006 general elections.

But blogs with political content had to register with authorities, and an outright ban was imposed on political podcasts streamed on the Internet. Notably, the Singapore Democratic Party, attempting to use podcasts to circumvent state-controlled media, suffered the brunt of this ban. Their Internet podcasts – the first time the medium was employed by political parties here – had to be taken off.

The party eventually suffered a drubbing at the polls, garnering a mere 23 percent of voters' support in the Sembawang constituency in northern Singapore.

As PAP MP Denise Phua noted after the elections, the Internet is “85 percent against the government” and had to be “managed”.

In the aftermath of the elections, the government and the state-controlled Singapore Press Holdings launched an Internet offensive, starting no less than three web portals, buying popular websites for millions of dollars.

But even as the government trumpets the easing of rules with its acceptance of two-thirds of the proposals for regulating the Internet, critics say the noose might well have been tightened around new media in Singapore.

The news that Australia in December 2008 gave the nod to Internet regulation has resurrected the burning question of the necessity – and feasibility – of a similar move in Singapore.

The Australian government announced it will block sites with “pornography and inappropriate material”, but citizens have expressed concern that the country is taking a giant democratic leap backward in joining China on the list of Internet policing countries.

But while more than 2,000 Australians took to the streets to protest the federal Labor government's plans to censor the Internet on Dec. 13, it has been a different scene in apathetic Singapore. (END/IPSAP/AMF/SJC/LLC/JS/220109)