The following article is extracted from The Economist.

In a country where the government has a pretty tight control over the traditional media—newspapers and television—Singaporeans with an appetite for alternative views have long gravitated towards the internet. So the news last week that one of the main independent socio-political blog sites The Online Citizen (TOC), is being “gazetted” by the government has sent shockwaves through Singapore’s burgeoning, boisterous (and now rather fearful) online community.

Gazetting sounds quaint, but is anything but. It’s a means by which the government can demand that any organisation be reclassified as the government sees fit. TOC is a kind of journalistic platform; the powers-that-be now want to register the organisation as a political association. The site is to be designated as a political website. This means that TOC will fall under the rules that govern other (normal) political organisations—like parties.

Under the Political Donations Act, TOC will be subject to a cap of 5,000 Singapore dollars ($3,900) in accepting anonymous donations and banned outright from receiving funds from foreign donors. The government’s registry of political donations has already asked TOC to identify clearly all its owners, journalists and anyone else associated with the site. It was given two weeks to comply. And this is but one of the new rules to which the site will be subject.

No specific reasons have been given for why the government wants to take this action, and at this particular moment in time. All the government has said, through its registry of political donations, is that “As a website that provides coverage and analysis of political issues, TOC has the potential to influence the opinions of their readership and shape political outcomes in Singapore. It has been gazetted to ensure that it is not funded by foreign elements or sources.”

Every journalist, of course, wants to influence the opinions of his or her readers—that’s why we we’re all in this business. The same, of course, could be said of almost any media organisation. More to the point, media observers say, is that there is a general election expected in the next few months and the Peoples’ Action Party government wants to start exerting some control over the unruly, independent-minded blogosphere—lest it spill over into effective opposition. One expert on the media in Singapore told me that it was a “clear warning” to the rest of the country’s online critics. We are watching you closely, and can take action.

The last time a comparable website was gazetted it happened in almost identical circumstances. Sintercom was told to register as a political association in 2001, also just before an election. On that occasion, the founder of the site closed it down rather than comply with the government’s demands and what he called the “self-censorship” that was expected of him.

Some analysts argue that gazetting should not in fact make much practical difference to TOC’s day-to-day operations. Indeed, the government argues that it will be free to carry on with its “normal, lawful operations”. The aforementioned media expert, however, says that the action against TOC is intended to cause a chilling effect on its content and that of other websites as well. As a political association, TOC says it will have to comply carefully with the Broadcasting Act. It will have to mind more carefully what it says, and it may think twice before straying into controversial areas, such as homelessness and income inequality—ie, the sort of self-censorship that the founder of Sintercom was not prepared to tolerate.

TOC, for its part, has sent off a letter to the prime minister’s office asking for an explanation. The website argues that that whereas it might have been critical of government policies, it has never indulged in “partisan” politics. TOC also says that it is quite open and transparent enough already. It cheekily adds that the website merely tries to live up to the prime minister’s words: he has said that he wants Singaporeans to be more “unconventional” and “spontaneous”.

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

SDP’s climate change policy paper: Taking urgent measures towards a smart and green future

On 8 February, the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) launched its climate change…

Wet and warm conditions to continue in the second half of April 2019

Moderate to heavy short-duration thundery showers are expected between the late morning…

PSP is a serious, credible and constructive party, says Dr Tan Cheng Bock as he urged Singaporeans to vote fearlessly

In his final political message for Progress Singapore Party’s (PSP) GE2020 campaign,…

港929“全球反极权大游行” 印尼记者采访中右眼疑中布袋弹受伤

香港上周日(29日)发起“全球反极权大游行”,期间爆发激烈警民冲突,场面火爆,甚至一名印尼籍女记者在湾仔采访期间,在告示打道天桥上疑被警员以布袋弹射伤眼睛,事后有警察公共关系科探员要求见该名受伤的记者被拒。 据《立场新闻》报道,“全球反极权大游行”原订当天 2点半在港岛区举行,而在中午12  点铜锣湾区一带设封锁线,并截查多名人士,但不阻止示威者游行。 抗争期间,警方多次发射催泪弹与出动水炮车清场,而 示威者投掷汽油弹。 下午4点左右,警方在湾仔来往港铁站至入境事务大楼的天桥上设立封锁线,附近也有大批媒体, 期间示威者与警方正在对峙,现场疑似发射布袋弹,导致一名印尼记者右眼受伤,随即倒地,而受伤记者在清醒的状态下被送上救护车。 现场场面火爆,数十人被捕,多名记者被水泡射中 此外,冲突期间,至少数十人被警方压制以及以警棍殴打,此外,警方在金钟道施放多枚催泪弹,并以水炮车在添华道及夏悫道上射水及蓝色水剂,多名记者被水炮射中。 大批示威者于冲突期间被捕,其中在金钟夏悫道及金钟道上有至少数十人被捕,多人被警方压在地上制服,有人被捕后仍被警员以警棍殴打,受伤头破血流、亦有人疑似受伤昏迷,需由担架抬上救护车。 入夜后,警方在铜锣湾多处设防线截查市民,拘捕多人。不少市民与警方对峙,指骂警员。…