Regulations on Political Commentary in Singapore

Though far from being an autocratic state, Singapore is still not a fully democratic state, and with that, comes restrictions on the usage of media, especially when they involve political issues, and breaking the rules can lead to very serious consequences.

On one hand, this restriction of opinions practiced by the government can be considered too harsh. One rather explicit restriction that comes to mind is that during election times, politcal podcasts are not tolerated. Should not the government welcome openness? Yes, although there may be times when such media may be used to spread misinformation, whether intentionally or not, there is little reason as to why such media should be banned completely. Free speech is a right of humans, and the people should be able to speak their own minds.

However, this is definitely not saying that any form of censorship is not justifiable. Without some form of control, anarchism is the likely outcome. Personally, I feel that there have to be definite limits placed. As time goes along, these boundaries can be pushed, adjusted, mitigated, until the people and the government are in agreement. However, absolute boundaries exist, which should never be compromised, such as those which protect people from slander and outright personal attack. The perfect balance between freedom and control is fine, and is far from easy to attain.

Furthermore, it would not be completely fair to say that the government is not trying to loosen up. Near the end of last year, as Catherine Lim put it, on her blog, "[The government is] not only unambiguously stating that the political process is ripe for change and evolution, but is actually backing up the statement with a flurry of measures". One of the changes includes the lightening of restrictions on political discussion on the Internet. Given the rising importance of the the Internet, it is nigh but impossible for the governement to continue on as it is, and rely on its control of traditional media sources, such as newspapers, to run the country, which it has been doing for ages now. Politicians elsewhere have been extensively using the Internet in promoting their ideas, such as in the previous US presidential elections. Now, it must turn to these newer media inorder to remain in power, and one of the ways this can be accomplished is by allowing a freer online political scene.

Of course, distinctions have to be made clear on what is harmful, and what is not. Take the example of the website TalkingCock.com, a popular Singapore satire website, which has spawned a Singlish twist on the Oxford Dictionary, and several movies as well. Despite commenting on political issues in Singapore, these are usually done in a fairly harmless manner, and are purely for fun. They represent the typical complaints of the average Singaporean, and usually do not cause any harm, and the Government must be very careful with such sites. Indeed, due to the fact that these sites may represent mirrors of the population's opinions, they can prove to be very useful to the government, and cannot be ignored, or taken likely; complaints should definitely be addressed, not simply censored out or ignored.

In the end, the Singapore Government is faced with the difficult task of walking the fine line between political freedom and control. In this everchanging landscape, the PAP cannot simply continue to rely on the age-old methods of an efficient, no-nonsense government to run the country, and has to adapt in order to survive, and this includes loosening up the political scene. There is still time; despite complaints, there still remains quite a strong impression that the country is being well run, and the Government can certainly use this time to get more in touch with the ways of a changing world.