~ TOC Editorial ~

April 2012 will forever be remembered as arguably the most significant milestone month in Singapore's online media landscape.

No, it has nothing to do with TOC's indulgence with its April Fool's joke, much as we wish our sense of humour is that well liked. It also has nothing to do with what would likely be the first physical gathering of bloggers to boo down the proposed Internet code of conduct, courtesy of the Institute of Policy Studies.

Indeed, the milestone comes from our political elite, infamous for its many blunders and politically-suicidal antics online.

This April, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong made waves online when he launched his Facebook page and attracted more than 40,000 fans within days.

By this count, it would seem that the PM himself has not only checked the box, but now sets the gold standard for one of his promises following General Elections 2011 – to engage more online.

But one wonders if he is engaging the online community, or merely engaging online. Has he fully exploited a highly interactive platform, or is he (or the Prime Minister's Office) still using it as an information/ ideology dissemination tool?

It is clear that PM is receiving a mass influx of comments on various issues. Nobody is expecting the PMO to handle all of them, so he was right in making a clarification post to say he has forwarded these citizen concerns to his Ministers – a positive step forward, as it (minimally and finally) acknowledges that online comments can be valid.

But one critical aspect of online engagement is transparency – at least in terms of the willingness to close the feedback loop. Not all of his Ministers are as willing to engage online. What have they done with these comments, and does having PM as mediator help facilitate the resolution of these issues?

If you have been one of those whose views have been flagged for attention to a Minister by PM Lee, we will like to hear from you about your experience. Let us know what has happened since, by adding your comments to this page.

Regardless, this move at the highest level of political leadership will be seen as a positive start for the online presence of the People's Action Party. But governance is not just about putting you photo online and letting it make friends with other photos.

Governance is about working the ground of your constituency to understand citizen issues, raising citizen concerns in parliament, and translating these concerns into policy formulation. Always in that order, but not always involving all components, which then depends on whether you are a Member of Parliament or a Minister.

So, as part of our "GE2011 One Year On" series, we would like to hear from you about how you think your elected representative has performed. But lets do it with a twist: Visit our Facebook discussion page, and submit an award nomination!

Most Cyber-Engaged Minister. Best Spectator in Parliament MP. Most Well-Walked for Walkabouts MP. Lifetime Achiever for Talking Down Singaporeans Minister. Whatever your peeve, whatever your pick, from the serious to the wackier, from any political party you care for, we want your submissions. Add a description to justify your choice, and we might just put it into our honour roll at the end of the week!

But we will not just let you do the thinking. On 7 May 2012, TOC will be running three commentaries on the three political parties currently represented in Parliament – PAP, WP and SPP. We will take a look at what they have done the past year, and if they have delivered on what they have promised based on their existing presence in Parliament.

Watch this space.

 

Also Read

The PAP – facing its new mandate by Ghui

The SPP – After Potong Pasir by Benjamin Cheah

 

 

 

 

 

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

MDA regulation of websites – Parliament sits on lack of assurance

By Howard Lee If Minister for Communication and Information Yaccob Ibrahim has…

Breaking: AGC files complaint against M Ravi

The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) has filed a complaint against human rights lawyer…

评论:个人代步工具– 关于阶级和愚昧无知

Nicholas Tang: 我必须老实说,我讨厌个人代步工具。我认为他们对社会是有威胁的,落实针对电动滑板车的禁令是应该的。我们也有同样的不满:我们讨厌它们在行人道上快速移动,我们讨厌个人代步工具让我们在已经非常狭窄的行人道,让路人无法安全走路,但通常就是很反感电动滑板车大声播放令人难受的音乐(例如小苹果),我觉得应该要把这也列为“犯罪行为”。 尽管如此,我却认为政府不应该禁止个人代步工具。当然,禁令是最简单快速的解决方式,但却不是最佳方案。这不仅仅是交通安全法规的问题,个人代步工具更像是揭露了社会的裂痕,而我们需要对这些裂痕加以修复,避免社会基础崩裂。我将聚焦在三种不同的要素,他们互相交织与连结,不能仅单独讨论:阶级、政府政策与社会责任。 阶级问题 其中阶级可分为两种问题:首先,他们被视为实用实惠,大众均负担得起;再者,个人代步工具开启了送餐行业新景象,让过去无法负担昂贵高效交通工具的人,找到另一种工作机会。 第一点,在颁布禁令后,网友何益豪(Kelvin Ho)将自己对禁令的不满发布到网上,其中已可明显看见阶级主义的效应。在Reddit中,所有的评论大部分聚焦在嘲笑他作为送餐员与新加坡口音。 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czuM9-uxnJ4 嘲笑他人口音缺同理心 当然或许他的送餐经验相对缺乏,但他确实提出几点值得讨论。此外,新加坡确实有一部分人的口音如同何益豪,尽管不能理解他的论点,但也不能成为攻击他个人品行的原因,这显示社会不同阶层的人对彼此缺乏同理心的一种表现。 何益豪提出了观点:不是每个拥有个人代步工具的人,都能够负担摩托车,或是其他交通工具。…

MP Jamus Lim calls for smaller class size in schools, says teachers still struggle with heavy workload no matter how outstanding they are

Speaking in Parliament on 3 March during the Committee of Supply debate,…