Page 2 of
2 To blog or not to blog in
Singapore By Alex Au
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 Singapore. This was in case
government
ministers wished to sue them
in future. The Far Eastern Economic Review was
asked to do likewise, but it refused, and
consequently import and sale of that magazine was
banned. 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 School
of Business demonstrated how social attitudes of
this generation have vastly changed compared with
their forebears. Of this cohort, 46% approved of
premarital sex (45% disapproved) and 50%
considered homosexuality "acceptable" (42%
disagreed).
Lecturer Kwa Lay Ping
attributed this to the widespread use of the
Internet and the diversity of views presented over
the medium. "As they go on the Internet, they're a
lot more exposed to more liberal programs about
alternative lifestyles than youths were in the
days before the Internet," she said.
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 Singapore's Web may only be a luxury so
long as blogs and website audiences remain small
and atomized. It is notable that where Malaysia
has spawned the critical Malaysiakini.com and
South Korea has the widely read OhMyNews.com, in
Singapore, despite a vibrant blogosphere and
Asia's third-highest Internet penetration rate, so
far nothing as established has blossomed in the
island state.
That raises another
important question: By maintaining such an
uncertain and potentially punitive legal
environment over the Internet, could Singapore be
ruling out for its future an entire value-added
industry? Singapore's mainstream media are too
stunted to grow regionally or globally, but that
shouldn't stop foreign media eventually making
inroads into the local market.
How can
Singapore, in its purported aim to become a
cutting-edge knowledge-driven economy, afford not
to have a vibrant digital news industry? For now,
there are no indications as to whether this
question is even being addressed in the corridors
of power, though it is being vigorously discussed
in various Web-based forums.
With just one
high-profile clampdown last year, there are still
not enough markers to chart the government's next
move. Though judging by certain official comments,
they may well be just treading water, waiting to
see how technology, censorship tools, and reading
habits evolve.
Alex Au is an
independent social and political commentator,
freelance writer and blogger based in Singapore.
He often speaks at public forums on politics,
culture and gay issues.
(Copyright
2007 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
