Slashdot Mirror
Singapore Paper Yanks Blogger Critique of Gov't
Hou writes "mr brown — aka Lee Kin Mun, Singapore's most famous blogger, has been writing a weekly column for a local Singaporean newspaper called 'Today.' Recently, one of his columns was more critical than the powers-that-rule liked, which was a satire on the increasing costs of living in Singapore. They issued a statement through the press secretary for the Ministry of Information, Communication and the Arts, and sternly chastised Mr. Brown for having expressed anti-government views. Not surprisingly, a few days later, Mr. Brown posted a notice saying that his column had been suspended by Today. " (More below.)
"Here's a snip from the government representative's statement:
It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government. (...) If a columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while exploiting his access to the mass media to undermine the government's standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics.Link to post on mr brown's blog, and the report from Reporters Without Borders. More blog entries can be found from fellow outraged bloggers here."
Cost of watching World Cup is up. Price of electricity is up. Comfort's taxi fares are going up.
Isn't that called inflation?
Singapore is a very nice country (I've lived there), but really, to call it a democracy is a farce. It's authoritarian rule. There's just enough "democratic hooks" that get everyone thinking it's a free country, when it really isn't. (If you remember Malaysia where the leader of the opposition party was arrested on some trumped up homosexuality charges that really weren't proven, just he ended up jailed anyhow because the ruling party felt threatened in the opposition's rise).
It's just the government is a far more subtle about what they do, but yes, all media is censored (TV, movies, newspapers, Internet (you have to use their proxy servers - no fake TCP RST's here)). When you visit, take note. From the looks of it, it looks a lot like any western country - well run, good order, clean streets, fairly affluent. You just don't notice that the government has a lot of control in many areas. (It's a bit of the "let foreigners pour money into this country, but don't let them dare infect our 'culture'" - there's a lot of anti-foreigner bias in Singapore, though you'll have a very hard time getting someone to admit it). China's worse, yes, but they're not as subtle about it. If the ruling party of Singapore feels threatened by what you write, well, expect to disappear. This guy got off lucky by only having his column cancelled (so far).
Well thank God I live in the United States!
Excuse my speling.
Making The Bar Project
"It is also not the place of the newspapers or media to abuse their position to take support, or take aggressive and critical stanaces that will undermine confidance of local or community busineses, forgien governments, or celebrities. As such, we will be changing the name of Newspapers to the more appropriate name Blankpaper. You'll be able to by this blank paper at any store and write whatever you want on it as long as you don't show it to anyone else. The End."
-Todd
Put down the sig, and step away from the computer.
You can't have a Democracy without free speech, because even if everyone votes against it there's always the possibility that they could change their minds - in which case, they would need it in order to get it back.
I hope I didn't confuse too many people just now.
Haiku for you!
News to me, but apparently, you can now get in deep legal poo in the U.S. for speaking "contemptuously of the president"
There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
The media has greater access than a normal person so they must be a-political. If you dare criticize the government, it is political because that is the only type of problems that a government has. Noone in the government would put their self-interest before public needs!
Take that Mr. Brown!
I have to be honest, the paper's response was *spot* on. It was not, as the slashdot summary made it seem to be, a political retraction. It was a specific commentary describing what the blogger's article did wrong and why. Not only that, it addressed every point of sarcasm that the blogger presented in his article, and did such with reason.
I don't claim to say that this makes the Singapore government a different beast (how did we start talking about the govt anyhow?), but I do care to say that it changes the entire situation. This blogger does not deserve to be a Matyr. He ranted and raved about how bad he's got it, and passed blame. If he felt that one or any of these programs were a failure, there are far better approaches to answering that question. I can't rant and rave like a lunatic too, but it doesn't make me a journalist.
- DaftShadow
The rules of conduct for a serving officer of a countries military are different than those of an ordinary citizen.
According to the link you posted the US government seems to be behaving very reasonably. Despite vocal opposition to the war, and his refusal to go to Iraq he is still permitted to go home at night while they investigate.
Many people actually believe that Singapore is the model 21st century state. There exists within Western Europe and Canada a very strong movement to shift those countries toward the Singapore model. Many Western European states, Canada and Australia already have state operated media monopolies, and many of the aforementioned states also have ruling parties which have a tendency to hold on to power for the majority of the time (e.g. Canada). Furthermore, in many states such as Belgium, the judiciary (appointed by the the ruling party, more often than not) has the ability to (and does) declare parties (e.g. the most popular party in the Dutch portion of Belgium -- Flanders) illegal. In addition, Free Speech is not considered absolute in any of these countries, with the majority of the population accepting that "limits" exist to "free speech," and the ruling parties having recently introduced legislation further cementing this stance (e.g. in the UK); these limits are indeed often enforced by the judiciary in many of these countries.
Incidentally, Singapore has undergone a very rapid demographic shift. The once majority population has, within less than three generation, been replaced primarily by Chinese immigrants who now make up 76.8% of Singapore's population. Aside from this, Singapore is considered one of the most diverse and multi-cultural places on Earth (supporting link). To enforce this utopian vision, and ensure harmony, freedom of speech has been restricted, in a manner similar to that of Western European states and Canada; from Wikipedia: "Laws restricting the freedom of speech are justified by claims that they are intended to prohibit speech that may breed ill will or cause disharmony within Singapore's multiracial, multi-religious society. For example, in September 2005, three bloggers were convicted of sedition for posting racist remarks targeting minorities.[5]." Once people accept that freedom of speech has "limits," perhaps the remaining portions of the Singaporean model flow naturally.
Uttering logically derived and empirically supported truths to the disciples of the orthodox establishment.
Actually, my statement was a bit of a back-handed compliment. Yes, the US does have more freedoms than do most countries - and it seems that Singapore is coming up quite the jerks on this one. But with the feds looking at the possibility of prosecuting the NY Times for treason for reporting leaked classified information, and the prosecution of ordinary citizens under the espionage act for even possessing information that is considered classified...
Then add domestic spying, etc. - and you can see that we have a government of extreme secrecy that WILL go to measures to stop people from critisizing the current administration. How many times has the current Executive branch of this government used the State Secrets privledge to dismiss lawsuits against it that seek to check the power of the federal government against the Constitution?
Don't be surprised at Singapore. In at least one forseeable scenario, you're looking at the future of the United States.
Excuse my speling.
Making The Bar Project
The US is fast becoming a place similar to those farcical democracies in the Middle East where you have liberties in image but in practice your exercise of them is either limited or ineffectual. The republicans seem to have learnt quite well from their Middle Eastern allies how to present the image of democratic particpation to their citizens while the game results are laregly fixed behind closed doors, and Americans are proving even more gullible than Middle-Easterners, at least Middle-Easterners know a bullshit when they see it. So you want to exercise your democratic rights and clown about? Well, go ahead, we'll send you our shills to clown against you and EVEN clown along with you. Religious bullshit, divisive non-issues, glorification of the leader and the troops, bought politicians, suspect elections, O'Reilly vs Olbermann, and so on. Had enough of your clowning, had fun, well revv it up, enterain the folks some more, torn your vocal cords yet? We're still winning elections and getting our business done. Seen it all in the Middle East, now seeing it in the US.
It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government. (...) If a columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while exploiting his access to the mass media to undermine the government's standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics.
It is scary how closely the Singaporean government's words mirror those of the Australian government when it was justifying withdrawing funding for charities that it deemed to be politically active. In out brave new globalised world it seems that totalitarianism is going global as well.
Gee, I wonder why the man would insist on anonymity...
It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government.
On the other hand, that could be a fairly good reason to want to stay anonymous.
If a columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while exploiting his access to the mass media to undermine the Government's standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics.
This sounds to me an awful lot like "You'll stay healthy as long as you say what we want you to say", given that Singapore is a one-party state and "partisan players" are literally criminals by definition. (I'm not being that unfair here: you'd be charged with violating the Internal Security Act. A Socialist who had the terminity to run against the government got hit with 23 years for that, eventually getting out in 1989 (source: http://friskodude.blogspot.com/2004/08/singapore-p olitical-dissidents.html ) More recently, the limping and ineffectual Opposition Party is busy seeing its key members get sued to death for "defamation" for calling the government, uh, less than a paragon of transparently democratic virtue.).
By the way, for the 430,000 Slashdotters who will say "Yeah, but Dubya is worse": whens the last time someone knocked on your door for illegal partisanship?
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
Income inequality widens markedly
Note that 10% of Singaporean households now have no income (at all) and the next decile has seen its average earnings drop 20% in the past 5 years, while the rich get richer.
Cheers,
-j.
I'm way to sleepy to google for it (just woke up) but US is about one-third from the top when it comes to personal freedom & stuff. Nowhere near the top. You do make the most noise about it, though, i'll admit to that.
I've read a year ago same article about Great Britain. Makes sense if you think a bit... the more money you have the more opportunities you have to earn more. Be it education, investments or just living near the place of work, upper and middle classes have the advantage. Moral of the story? Try to be above the demarcation line, not below.
Oh, and in that article it said the "poor" stayed the same. No sign of getting poorer, just most of the "new money" went to the richer.
You're confusing Asia with the Middle East...
As the tourist T-shirts go, Singapore is a "fine" city -- they'll just give you a fine for something like that. They reserve the more corporal punishments for truly criminal acts where there's no doubt you should know better but did it anyway. You might spit if you get some sand in your mouth, but you don't "accidentally" graffiti someone's car. (and repeated offenses in the case of the dumbass who finally got himself caned a few years back)
Hmm? Look at the data -- the percentage of people with no income has increased, and the average income of the poorest families has decreased in absolute terms, which means they did even worse in inflation-adjusted real terms.
Cheers,
-j.