Facebook social media app logo on log-in, sign-up registration page on mobile app screen on iPhone smart devices in business person’s hand at work from Shutterstock.com

As the saga in relation to the HIV data leak in Singapore rages on, it has been reported that Facebook has (of its own volition) removed the Facebook accounts of American fraudster Mikhy K Farrera Brochez along with several posts containing allegations against the Singaporean authorities and the prison doctor who treated him. In justifying its removal, Facebook cited its “Community Standards” which would require content that “poses a credible threat of harm to others” to be removed.

With this in mind, why is Senior Minister of State for Law Edwin Tong  (Tong) so harsh on his views of Facebook calling it “a platform for spreading lies and falsity that poison and divide societies as well as encouraging xenophobia and to profit from that”. Tong had made those comments in relation to the social media giant’s refusal to take down a post by sociopolitical site States Times Review, which linked to an article on its site alleging that Singapore was being investigated in relation to the 1MDB scandal. Clearly, Facebook did not deem this article, which has clearly ruffled a few governmental feathers, as content that has the potential to contribute to imminent violence or physical harm. To be fair to Facebook, neither do I.

The government has many ways to defend its good name. Why does it need to attack Facebook or resort to making fresh regulations against the use of social media? Has Facebook harmed Singaporeans or is it more that it is a threat to the reputation of the ruling party?

That article by the States Times Review has already been debunked and I would say that no reasonable minded Singaporean has put any faith in it. Why then is Tong and the Singapore government still pressing ahead with the need for regulation to compel the social media giants to remove content? Clearly, regulation was not needed to clear up this falsehood.

Perhaps there might be a segment of Singaporeans who still believe in falsehoods but no matter what, this segment of society will always exist. Regulation will have limited effects on this.

Facebook has definitely had its failings but from the way it has dealt with the HIV data leak, it is clear that it does have an internal compass to deal with what it deems inappropriate. Could it be construed that legislation is being pushed out to regulate social media content so as to protect those currently in power from potential criticism as opposed to Singaporeans in general? Or that the government would then have the right to decide what are “facts” and what are “fake news”?

And if so, is this acceptable?

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

Health Minister Gan Kim Yong says HSA will review Sinovac vaccine before rolling out to public; Brazil reports efficacy of the vaccine at 50.4 per cent

Minister of Health Gan Kim Yong said on Wednesday (13 January) that…

MINDEF makes formal representation to Hong Kong on detention of SAF’s Terrex ICVs

Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) has announced on Friday (23 December) that it…

M Ravi to appear in court on Wednesday to answer Criminal Defamation charge

Human Rights lawyer M Ravi will be appearing in State Court this…

动用170亿元储备金 额外配套助保障就业、助企业克服挑战

副总理兼财政部长王瑞杰称,感谢总统原则上支持,在额外“坚韧财案”配套下,将动用170亿元储备金。 该配套将分为三大部分:其一,保障就业、扶助雇员生计;其二,助企业克服当前挑战以及加强经济和社会韧性。 政府拨出151亿新元,进一步加强雇佣补贴计划,并将延长至今年年底。雇主在今年5月、7月和10月获得补贴。王瑞杰相信这将指出190万雇员。 为每位在职雇员提供薪资补贴,从原本的八巴仙,升至25巴仙。符合条件的雇员收入顶限也从3600元,调至4600元。 餐饮企业可获50巴仙薪资补贴;航空、旅游业则是75巴仙。