During the last elections, the use of podcasts, internet blogs and internet forums for political profit during the period of campaigning was essentially banned.
"The streaming of explicit political content by individuals during the election period is prohibited under the Election Advertising Regulations. A similar prohibition would apply to the videocasting or video streaming of explicitly political content."
Dr. Balaji Sadasivan, April 02, 2006.
The 2006 GE gave the electorate a glimpse of the might of the New Media; essentially, the use of Podcasts, Internet Blogs, Forums to communicate ideas, opinions and even policies. The New Media provided an alternative choice to the mainstream media, practically, the New Media allows the electorate to catch a glimpse of news, opinions and mindsets that were censored by the mainstream media ruthlessly.
In the aftermath of the 2006 General Elections, the issue of the New Media was constantly on the mind of the ruling party, the People's Action Party(PAP). From my perspective, the PAP was not prepared for the emergence of podcasts, internet blogs and forums during the campaigning period, thus the ban on using internet media as a tool for campaigning. Even after the elections, the PAP was clueless on how to tackle the challenges brought about by the emergence of the new media.
The urge to censor and keep out inappropriate infomation (infomation that is deterimental to the interests of the PAP) on the internet is especially tempting; provided the means and ways are available to the government. Logically, this is usually the practice of a government that rules with an iron fist. In this instance, the Third Reich, U.S.S.R, and more recently the military rulers in Thailand pops up in my mind.
Thus, it is of utmost importance that the PAP do not try to control the flow of infomation, the exchange of ideas and even personal opinions in the internet-sphere. Furthermore, I would also like to urge the PAP not to interfere in the mainstream media. They could start by diluting their influence in the mainstream media; especially in the Straits Times and Channelnewsasia.
Listed below are 2 examples where infomation and news on the mainstream media were restricted.
a.
Daily newspaper Today sacks blogger “Mr brown” after government criticismb. A complete media blackout on the rally march conducted by the SDP during the IMF-World Bank event in Singapore.
- SDP's Rally March demanding for Transparency and Accountability - Video
Let me explain the reasons behind my appeal for the government to open up the mainstream media and not even think of trying to censor the New Media.
1. The PAP should not be seen as working in complete contrary to the open society that they envision and proclaim.
2. Again, Singaporeans are living in a democracy and we, the people of Singapore on the 6th of May 2006, elected into parliament a democratic government, not a dictatorship.
Right now, the PAP might be thinking that I'm being too idealistic and the above 2 reasons are not practical and doesn't hold much truth.
If this is the case, let me propose a more sensible reason: The PAP has been eagerly positioning themselves mainly in the form of a publicity campaign to tap on the viewpoints and opinions of young Singaporeans. And it ever the PAP is to censor and control infomation, ideas and views on the New Media, it would constitute a colossal backlash. This only further reinforces the fact that the ruling PAP government is not interested at all in getting feedback from the ground. Opinions in forums, blogs and even podcasts are original and as raw as you can get. True and Frank to the core. These constructive criticisms and praise are what the PAP need to move the society and economy forward and maintain the unity of all races in Singapore(PAP 2006 Election Manifesto: "Staying Together, Moving Ahead")
In the first place, if the PAP only want to hear stuffs that is pleasing to the ear and eye, then I would suggest them to busk in the literature of the Straits Times and stay tuned to CNA all round the clock, and stop wasting public funds on creating a feedback unit, organising forums on TV and in schools. Start to subscribe to Reuters, International Herald Tribune for all PAP officials?
A better appreciation of all form of diverse ideas and opinions would not only generate better policies and thus enhance its electoral chances, but it also goes a long way in being recognized as a tolerant and amiable government; hallmark of a 1st World government.
Looking at the way things are going, the PAP is pretty far behind in the race to be a 1st World government, something which they aren’t really used to.
