Mar 23rd, 2007
Conflicting signals from government
Email This Post
Print This Post
Not too long ago, the government was talking about sending anonymous spies to counter the “untruths” out there on the Internet. And now, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan says this:
“Although there is much offensive and untrue material in cyberspace, there is no need, nor is it practical, to pursue each and every transgression.”
I think I need Panadol. This kind of mixed signals is twisting my brain too much. One day this, another day that. Maybe the true intention is to make bloggers die of headache at trying to decipher what is real and what isn’t. 
And now we have a new form of censorship called ‘ceremonial censorship’. Honestly, what is that? According to Channel News Asia, ceremonial censorship means “drawing a line in cyberspace but taking into account the evolution of society”. The explanation is so vague that it’s as good as not explaining.
In the same report, Dr Balakrishnan was quoted to have said,
“… the most potent impact the new media will have on politics is that politicians will find it hard to lie in future as there will always be citizens who will publish the truth in blogs or online.”
But didn’t he also say that there are alot of offensive and untrue material? I’m thoroughly confused now. What then is true and what is not? I wonder will Dr Balakrishnan consider websites like http://www.yeocheowtong.com/ truth or untruth? I don’t know what is the benchmark to judge truth and untruths. Dr Balakrishnan makes it sound so simple.
Maybe I’m just not smart enough. 
Read the rest of the report at Channel News Asia.
Loading ...
Aaron,
I also don’t understand. As in I don’t understand why you see a contradiction.
Sounds like he is stating what all bloggers have already known… that there is a lot of content out there, some of it true, some of it false. Don’t think it is a case of “the same statement is both true and false”.
You might as well be saying it is a contradiction to claim [1] “…in America there are people who vote Republican…” and [2] “…in America there are people who vote Democrat…”.
now you know what the politicians do…throw a lot of smoke and confuse everyone. heh.
I say raise his pay! Considering the amount he has saved Singapore by limiting the public assistance to old folks in Singapore to $290 instead of $400 (as proposed by Dr Lily Neo), I am sooo thankful. Yes, raise his pay, and all the Perm Sec in MCDY.
Mr Ko,
I think Dr Balakrishnan was trying to say that there are people who will speak the truth, and there are people who will speak falsehood. That is a completely fair statement. But to go on to say that it is harder for politicians to lie because there will be people who will publish the truth goes a little too far for me. It could also be that it is harder for politicians to tell the truth because people there will be people who publish lies. Which is the correct? I’m kind of lost.
I was wondering if he is conceding that “PAP anonymous assault” in the blogsphere didn’t work out. (I think it very much seems like that their campaign didn’t take-off like P65 blog.) So, he is now saying that it’s not practical to go on assault and “defend our [PAP/government] reputationâ€, rather monitor the situation, and let anti-PAP keep voicing out stuff because they are not willing to get influenced at any cost (even if PAP argument makes sense), etc.
What do you think, guys?
Tay,
I won’t rule out the possibility that you raised. Maybe it’s a nice way of backing out of the sticky situation created with the annoymous assault announcement. Or maybe there’s a split of opinion within the government? * wonders about the conspiracy theories*
Singaporeans may be growing up politically, but their numbers are shrinking as the country is being swamped by less informed and docile FTs.
Aaron,
you shouldn’t have get confused.
Ambiguous statement is what talking cock is all about.
VB’s statement shouldn’t have been quoted in your site for criticism but rather in http://www.talkingcock.com
Millions of dollars of salary has been pay to ministers to say thing that as good as not saying.
Singaporean will perhaps like to learn their way too so that when Singaporean work aboard, they can confused their boss as well and earn millions.
We have an 100% honest gov that sometimes doesn’t speak the truth. But still, we have 100% very honest gov as proclaimed by gov.
That’s the kind of logic taught by our gov.
So put in this way, you have $100 dollars and gov take away $50, so you still left with $100. I don’t know how can that be but that what gov imply.
So what if there are conflicting signals from the government? Do you act
on their signals like a trained dog responding to a dog whistle? That’s
the problem with you people — you don’t have a mind of your own. No
wonder the despot can enslave you people for so long.
Aaron
Pse dun contemplate politics, that does not mean tat you cannot be a politician since men are political animals, ahem, beings rather.
Just stay clear, focused n be fundamentally consistent
OT slightly..
“`If you care too much about Singapore, first it’ll break your spirit, and finally it will break your heart` Alfian Bin Sa’at”
I wish it would not be true, I do think it applies more to the “gahmen” than Singapore the nation in the sociological notion of the word.
My heart broke long ago.
______________
CelluloidReality(s) SINGAPORE // Mar 26, 2007 at 11:24 pm
“`If you care too much about Singapore, first it’ll break your spirit, and finally it will break your heart` Alfian Bin Sa’atâ€
Aaron,
The Internet, the fluid and constantly transforming blogosphere is causing the government ALOT of consternation. They must be watching the development of the Malaysian blogosphere and its influence of its citizens over Malaysian politics very closely.
As it is, because this is really completely new terrain, they are feeling their way about. At the end of the day, you will find policies issued and rescinded many times over as the government works to find the best way to shackle this beast.
Hi Paul,
Thanks for the thoughtful comment. My question to you now would be whether it is necessary to “shackle” the beast.
Aaron,
It would be impossible to shackle the beast. They know it. But figuratively speaking, they will still want to find out the best way to manage it.
They tried to in the May elections last year, attempting to stop political podcasts, and blogs from covering politics. Wanted all such blogs to register itself, if you remember. After some questioning in Parliament, they rescinded and said no need to. Only blogs or websites who persistently promoted political views had to register with the MDA.
China also has such censorship. In one of my jobs, I have seen how traffic from China were severely curtailed due to firewall rules. The Chinese have tons of money and lots of human resources to do this. But, it is not sustainable.
Ahh… I misunderstood your question. In my opinon, Aaron, the government should not shackle the beast.
A very clear example here was Mr. Philip Yeo’s accessibility through the comments section of your blog. Through his answering of rationally and politely placed questions, we were all able to better see from where he stands. And, we all understood better his humanity in all of this.
Similarly, if the government continues to shackle (For lack of a better term) this beast, it will continue to breed distrust.
I feel it would be better to be open about the whole thing.
Agreed.
As for China’s case, for every firewall that pops up, there will be people who dedicate their time to break through that “Great Wall” to secure a free flow of information.
The Internet is not a beast to be shackled, it is bigger than any single nation. This is the reality all governments have to live with. Either you leverage and work with it, or you sink.
Philip Yeo’s recent activity on the blogosphere have actually improved many people’s perception that civil servants are hard to engage with. It’s a positive step forward.
Everything on the Yeo Cheow Tong website is pretty well documented, as it is in http://www.escapefromparadise.com. Yes, there is some humor, but it is obviously just that - much like political cartoons. The photo of Goh Chok Tong spanking his wife is a good example of a political cartoon. By the way, that photo has become extremely popular on the Internet.