Regulation of political commentary on the Internet in Singapore

I do not agree that political commentary should be allowed on the internet in Singapore. The Singapore government keeps a firm control over all Medias – newspapers, television, radio and of course, the internet. They set up very strict guidelines and they expect all the citizens to abide them. Censorship, fines and many other punishments are also imposed if one does not adhere to those rules, so we can literally say that we do not have the freedom of speech and political freedom, very much unlike America. But the government has its purposes and reasons. If the members of the public abuse the internet and put on false information to defame the government, others who do not check its credibility might unknowingly believe the false information and change their perceptions views, and may result in the change of decisions in the next parliamentary voting. Such rumours are easily to fabricate, very quick to spread around, and extremely hard to correct. Also, the internet is viewed by an increasing amount of people, especially the young generation, from all over the world. People from other countries might be falsely informed upon reading such information. Censorship is therefore strictly imposed to prevent such events from happening. Even though the government has been heavily criticized for their decisions to impose such censorships, I personally do feel that it is extremely important. It can prevent slander of political would-be and current candidates. Criticism will not change the government’s decisions and actions. The capability of the government and the outcome will not change just because of the few people’s discontent. The Singapore government has been running since independence with only one party but has been doing well and steady, despite some economic downturns at times. And even though a portion of the public has been angered by some of its actions, for example, they forced people to sell their private houses to build MRT tracks etc. the general life of the people of the nation have been consistently improved and pampered.

No one is perfect and definitely the government isn’t. The government has been criticized for regulating political comments on the internet because they restrict the people’s lives. The citizens want a government who understands their needs but not to try and cover up all their flaws to impose a perfect image of themselves. They want their government to know what is going on with their lives and the many difficulties they encounter in their lives. They want their government is work for the public and not for the benefits of oneself, and by restricting their political freedom could be a huge impact on what the citizens thinks of them. However, it is almost close to impossible to please everyone in the country. If the government seeks to solve the problems for some, another will soon arises out of the previous solved problem, so on and so forth, and the chain will continue on the on, no matter what the government tries to do.

However, we cannot say that they don’t have political freedom at all. Even though the Americans criticized us of the restrictions, the government is actually very flexible when compared with communist countries like North Korea, China, and Myanmar etc. where information is heavily filtered and restricted and people who do not abide with the government would be severely dealt with. However in Singapore, political content is only filtered thoroughly during election period to prevent biasness and defamation. Also, the government has allowed a few exceptions despite banning many others, and one fine example would be the website by Mr. Brown, “Talking Cock”.

Personally, I do feel that the government’s regulation of political commentary on the internet is actually helping us. Many of the citizens do not really know what politics is and how complex it works and would believe the many rumours which spread around very easily and quickly, and by regulating the internet such unpleasant things would not take place at all. Additionally, many internet users do not know their limits and often go way beyond the line which separates right and wrong, leading to many problems and misunderstandings. Thus, I agree to the government’s regulation of political commentary on the internet.

President’s Star Charity Show- is there a need for artistes to perform stunts to milk the public’s compassion for more generous donations?

I do not agree at all to the need for artistes to perform stunts to encourage the audience to donate more. If one genuinely is aware of the misfortunate people and the hardships they faced, and is willing to fork out money to help these people, I believe that they would probably not donate through such means. However, I believe artistes performing stunts is used because it will appeal to people who do not understand or care about the lives of the people in need. Personally, I believe that money should not be involved at all. If we do care about the needy, I think the best way to show our efforts to visit their homes and bring them joy and laughter, or also giving them food items and daily necessities. Most of the time if money is involved corruption usually surface. Take NKF’s case for example. Millions of dollars were donated to NKF by the members of the public with the mindset that the financially weak patients are able to be treated. But in the end, almost half of the money donated went to the hands of greedy and wealthy people. Even though in the end he was finally caught, it severely broke the trust the nation had in the organization, and the people who truly suffer from it are the patients – they still lack the financial assistance. Thus I believe time and effort is worth more than money, even though money is still largely required.

Now, let us go back to the topic, artistes performing stunts. Artistes are taught by “professionals” before the shows for the stunts. And these “professionals” are paid to teach the artistes for such acts. Also, all the materials, costumes, props etc. all costs – at the expense of the donations. This amount though, is not really a huge sum. What is much worse is the fact that mediacorp brought in the lucky draw. I feel that this is outrageous and ridiculous. The top prize, which is a car, as well as all the other prizes is bought with the money gathered from the donations and a few “lucky” donators will be chosen to be given those prizes. They would then describe them as “kindness begets happiness” while I think that this is absurd. Imagine yourself, donating $10 thinking that it will help those unfortunate people who are physically and financially unwell, but instead a fraction of your contribution was instead used to buy the prize for another donator. Yes, even though you stand the same chance of winning the prizes and even though this did not occur in the President Star Charity show but in other charity shows, the mindset of the organizers is terribly wrong. If people really do donate more because of the lucky draw, then I think we should think about why we want to donate and where do our donations actually go to.

Also, if the artistes really are serious about helping the misfortunate, they should spend their time to help them out instead of training stunts to encourage others to donate. Or, I believe a live concert or a band performance could really be enough instead of difficult stunts and performances. If people are really aware of the poor’s sufferings then they would still donate. However, personally, I feel that what makes the greatest impact on the audience would be a parliament member of a rather high ranking post making a simple performance. I am sure the members of the public would be amazed by it!

Therefore, I believe that artistes performing stunts is not required or needed to milk the public’s compassion for the President Star Charity show, since if the people really care for the poor and the misfortunate, such charity shows would not be required at all. Also, it would be far better if we donate directly to the organization itself, and not through such charity shows, for you can minimize corruption and all other possible means part of your donations could be wasted, and secondly, no GST and call fees could be charged [every charity show take in more than a million!]