Comments, opinions and an occasional ramble
Is the gahmen going to regulate cyberspace now?
Lui Tuck Yew has made it clear that he’s disappointed with some of the callous online responses towards the burning of MP Seng Han Thong. He said this episode shows that it is ‘quite apparent the Internet is not an effective self-regulated regime as some may have touted it to be‘.
Ok, he has a point about those morons who actually gloated over the episode. If one is unhappy about something, there are civilised ways to resolve issues. However, I have absolutely no idea how he comes to the conclusion that the Internet is ineffective at self-regulation based on this issue. What exactly is his benchmark for ‘effective self-regulation’? A online lynch mob going after these morons?
Seriously, while the comments of some online idiots get publicity, the question is, how many of them are actually taken seriously? I think Singaporeans in general have enough brains to tell whether what they are reading was written by a nutcase. I think the folks in government should get the whole magic bullet assumption out of their head. It doesn’t mean if I read a few nutcases praising the attack on MP Seng I will also start praising the attack. It also doesn’t mean that if I don’t say anything, I am agreeing with these nutcases. It could well be that to me, these morons are not even worth my time to respond to them.
The bottomline is that in any democratic space, there are are all kinds of people with all kinds of ideas and opinions. There will always be people on the extremes but I don’t think these extremists will gain much traction with most people. Give them the chance to let off some steam. Sure, we can regulate and try and prevent such things from being said but this will merely drive the extremists underground and off the radar. That would be far more dangerous because they’ll only mix with their own ilk and who knows how much more radical these extremists will become.
I certainly don’t hope that the government doesn’t start deeming it necessary to intervene in the online space. 
| Print article | This entry was posted by Aaron Ng on 05/02/2009 at 12:49 pm, and is filed under Perspective. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 1 year ago
I agree with you; even in the real world there are such jokers. No one will take them seriously. In any case, it is difficult for the govt to regulate cyberspace.
about 1 year ago
there is another way of looking at it (not that i disagree with you), the blogosphere (i feel) has always seemed like a microcosm of Singaporean in general, the “lesser mortals”.
anyone going around the housing estates and listen to market and coffeeshops talk would realise that the “heartlanders” either don’t care about it i.e. not talking about it (this is the majority) or have sympathy with the offender (which is few). Seldom do you heard about people being sympathetic towards the MPs.
i feel that this episode also shows how much anger the “people” have towards the gahmen in general, be it a few but that’s how the camel’s back is broken isn’t it, via many small incidents.
about 1 year ago
eternalhap:
“In any case, it is difficult for the govt to regulate cyberspace.”
I suggest you do some research on how the Chinese and Burmese governments regulate cyberspace (and how effective they have been in doing it). And in case you don’t know, Internet traffic in our little island is actually and already being regulated. Therefore, it won’t be too much of a stretch for the powers-that-be to put in a structure to tighten the current regulations on Internet use.
Aaron:
“I think Singaporeans in general have enough brains to tell whether what they are reading was written by a nutcase.”
This is a scary assumption that you have made. I’m not implying that there is stupidity but do think about a social (and no less important) phenomenon called “The Emperor’s New Clothes” effect.
“It doesn’t mean if I read a few nutcases praising the attack on MP Seng I will also start praising the attack. It also doesn’t mean that if I don’t say anything, I am agreeing with these nutcases. It could well be that to me, these morons are not even worth my time to respond to them.”
How many Aarons are there in Singapore? Okay. To narrow this even more for you, how many people in Singapore think like Aaron?
One note from history maybe you should consider is this:
Despite the fundamental problems with regards to the party ideology, how did the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (or popularly known as Nazis) in pre-World War II Germany receive so much support from the masses to allow Hitler to rise to power?
about 1 year ago
IrCTP,
I’ve indeed made an assumption, and it’s an assumption I thought was safe enough to make. I would be really, really sad to find out this assumption isn’t true.
With regards to Hitler, you have a point but I think Hitler could take advantage only because Germany was economically ravaged at that time. It is my belief that when people are desperate, they’ll can and will resort to anything to get out of their desperate situation.
about 1 year ago
The lure of the internet is anonymity. I’ve read some of these ridiculous remarks by “nutcases” online and I am not sure if they really represent views on the ground, or it could also be the same group of people going around saying the same nutcase thing.
I do agree that Lui Tuck Yew’s comments on this are ludicrous.
As someone who does volunteer work I must however say that those who are really down and out and poor, many times are grateful for whatever help they get and they don’t gripe about the same nutcase things like those nutcases. It’s pretty much people who sit behind their computer screens, have the luxury of being anonymous and yet don’t have to go down to the ground who can go on and complain about all things under the sun. They don’t have to step out beyond their comfort zones and help others. What have they done really besides talk?
about 1 year ago
No we are not dealing with a nutcase; far from it. We could be dealing with a von manstein for all we know. It doesnt pay to underestimate an intelligent man; bear in mind, he is probably the smartest of the lot in Cheong yip seng’s motley crew; we knows exactly what he’s doing; it was a calculated move; he would have already calculated the fall out / pay out cost. Despite that he said, I will commit – no I think he’s posturing and testing waters here. That would roughly be the same thing our planners would have done; if we were on the other side as well.
We need to monitor this very carefully.
SD
about 1 year ago
IrCTP: Yep, I do know about the cyberspace regulation in China, and in Singapre as well. But what I’m referring to is that the cost of Internet regulation is heavier than the benefits accrued.
Firstly, Singapore’s cyberspace is not just about politics; and secondly, those who rant on political issues cannot actually influence govt policies. They create noise. Like what Aaron said, we should trust people to have the common sense to judge what’s nonsense and what’s not. Most netizens contribute in a sensible manner, like what they would do in real life, even though they are anonymous, as cybergoddness said about the lure of the Internet. Regulation of the cyberspace because of a few bad eggs is too costly.
Most importantly, we haven’t seen how dissent in the cyberspace spills over to the public arena. The govt may criticise the chatter here, but they aren’t going to forcefully regulate it.
about 1 year ago
Aaron, I’ve read one or two articles on your blog and I must say it’s quite interesting. I was on wayangparty and that site’s basically a whole lotta nutcases really. No objectivity at all.
I will keep reading your site
about 1 year ago
Looks like this issue has got many bloggers talking. I wrote about it on my blog too. Have a read if you have the time and let me know what you think.
about 1 year ago
If Lui TY is to be taken seriously, then STOMP shd be the first site to be taken down, followed by ST Online. How abt exterminating all dissent and clone “good citizens”? Is that why we are taking so much interest in Bio Science?
about 1 year ago
Aaron:
“I’ve indeed made an assumption, and it’s an assumption I thought was safe enough to make. I would be really, really sad to find out this assumption isn’t true.”
Ever come across the statement about how uncommon common sense is?
“With regards to Hitler, you have a point but I think Hitler could take advantage only because Germany was economically ravaged at that time.”
Aren’t indications almost everywhere pointing towards many economies being ravaged in the near future? And…
“It is my belief that when people are desperate, they’ll can and will resort to anything to get out of their desperate situation.”
So there you go.
You’ve made a fair assumption but history might prove that your assumption may just be too ideal. Never expect people to do smart things when they are desperate.
about 1 year ago
eternalhap:
“But what I’m referring to is that the cost of Internet regulation is heavier than the benefits accrued.”
Three immediate questions spring to mind:
(a) How much do you know about the cost of Internet regulation (or policing it)?
(b) How much is the cost?
(c) What are the possible lengths that certain people will go just so that subversive or dissenting conversations / voices can be put away?
In addition to China, I also mentioned Burma and the government’s fairly successful regulation of the Internet there. Is Burma a rich country with deep pockets who can afford the “high cost” of Internet regulation?
“Like what Aaron said, we should trust people to have the common sense to judge what’s nonsense and what’s not. Most netizens contribute in a sensible manner, like what they would do in real life, even though they are anonymous, as cybergoddness said about the lure of the Internet.”
I think I have given Aaron some considerations about how (un)common common sense is.
“The govt may criticise the chatter here, but they aren’t going to forcefully regulate it.”
Is that your assumption then that the Government “aren’t going to forcefully regulate it”? More surprising things have happened, I think.
about 1 year ago
I disagree with Lui Tuck Yew’s remarks but my comments from wayangparty were deleted. I think that’s very unfair for people calling for freedom of speech.
about 1 year ago
Cybergoddess,
Double standards happen all the time. Not everyone has the guts to stand by what they declare. I call for freedom of speech and I stand by it (unless they accidentally get caught in my spam filter, which can take a while to de-spam because I don’t check the filter often). Check out how many comments there are on this blog accusing me of being part of the PAP or claiming I’m anti-PAP. Pretty interesting.
about 1 year ago
cybergoddess:
Many Singaporeans are clueless about how they should deal with comments that are in disagreement with their views. Haven’t you noticed how debates are kept at the JC-level and we rarely see debates (be it political or non-political issues) involving adults on television?
So when they find no ways of coming up with a decent way of rebuttal, they will either shout you down with thinly-veiled personal insults or simply remove your argument — no matter how valid it may be.
In short, Singaporeans are hopeless when it comes to debates / discussions.
(In this regard, I should give Aaron some credit for not removing comments wily-nily unlike many other famous bloggers that we know.)
about 1 year ago
IcCTP:
“(a) How much do you know about the cost of Internet regulation (or policing it)?
(b) How much is the cost?
(c) What are the possible lengths that certain people will go just so that subversive or dissenting conversations / voices can be put away?”
Firstly, I don’t know the cost – do you? You cannot compare Mynamar with us – what’s the percentage of Myanmar’s population who is online? And so their cost of regulation will be significantly lower.
My idea of ‘cost’ is accounting cost + opportunity cost, with the latter playing a major role in calculating it – the govt could have spent resources policing the Net on other expenditure needs.
For question (c), for this ‘certain people’ you’re referring to, I doubt it’s the govt. My view is that the govt has more things to do than wasting time and resources regulating cyberspace. Can you enlighten me on ‘more surprising things’? I’m really unsure of this, seriously.