ADVISORY COUNCIL ON THE IMPACT OF NEW MEDIA ON SOCIETY

ADVISORY COUNCIL ON THE IMPACT OF NEW MEDIA ON SOCIETY:

(Report on cyberspace regulation): 2.

Miss Penny Low asked the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts (a) what is the rationale behind the step-by-step approach in the Government's acceptance of the report of the Advisory Council on the Impact of New Media on Society (AIMS) published in December 2008 which recommended the liberalisation of cyberspace; and (b) in the light of past experience, whether local netizens have shown sufficient maturity and consistency in entering a self-regulated regime and, if not, how can the Ministry, netizens and related NGOs help develop a more responsible cyberspace that can eventually be self-regulated.

The Senior Minister of State for Information, Communications and the Arts (RAdm [NS] Lui Tuck Yew) (for the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts): The Government has accepted most of the AIMS' recommendations. But in some areas, we have differed from the AIMS' proposal for liberalisation and have opted for a progressive and pragmatic approach. Let me explain why.

First, on e-engagement, the Government agrees with AIMS that an evolutionary approach is sensible. Government agencies need time to build capabilities and experience in e-engagement. It is also simply not feasible nor productive for the Government to engage on all websites or blogs, as this will simple require too much resources. Hence, it makes practical sense to focus

Column: 1626

our available resources to engage on established platforms, such as the REACH portal and the online letter forums of our mainstream media.

REACH offers a convenient one-stop portal for citizens who want to be heard and who would like to offer their views, reactions and suggestions to the Government. Views, for and against, are welcomed in the spirit of a robust, constructive and meaningful debate. In fact, anyone who visits REACH will be able to see the diversity of comments and vigorous exchanges taking place in the discussion forum and blogs.

On e-engagement, while we are proceeding cautiously, we are not closed to the idea of engaging on other objective and credible sites, in future.

Concerning online political content, the Government has in fact gone beyond the AIMS' recommendation. We have accepted the AIMS' recommendation to expand the positive list to allow political parties, and their election candidates and agents, to use new media tools in Internet election advertising, such as in promoting themselves, their manifestoes and their activities during election. In addition, we are allowing individuals to participate in Internet election advertising, by blogging or posting election materials. Beyond this, we are also allowing party political films that would be exempted under the Films (Amendment) Bill for Internet election advertising during elections.

AIMS has recommended removing the registration requirement for political parties as well as individuals and bodies of persons who provide any programme for propagation, promotion or discussion of political or religious issues relating to Singapore through Internet websites. AIMS believes that the removal will allow people to participate freely.

Column: 1627

The registration requirement does not carry any additional restrictions. Registrants are subjected to the same set of Class Licence conditions and the Internet Code of Practice as any other non-registered Internet Content Provider. The reason for requiring registration is to maintain a higher level of accountability of those responsible for such websites. Registration has not stopped political parties' websites from posting critical comments and engaging in free and open discussions on government policies and issues.

Overall, the Government has taken significant and substantive steps to expand the space for socio-political discourse. I would like to assure the House that we will continue to review and update our policies to keep them relevant with the times and technology.

Let me now address the second part of the question. We have not done any studies to assess the level of maturity and consistency of local netizens in entering a self-regulated regime. However, for Members of the House who have surfed the Internet, you would have observed that while there are some serious and objective postings, there is also a prevalence of noises, rumours and distortions in cyberspace. As the AIMS report has noted, while there were reasoned and critical views, there were also "a great deal of unhelpful commentary and discussions online".

In fact, it would be quite apparent that the Internet is not an effective self-regulated regime as some may have touted it to be. Rumours and lies are prevalent in cyberspace. Flaming and cyber-bullying are not uncommon. Unfortunately, this is the downside of the Internet, given the borderless nature of cyberspace and the cloak of anonymity that comes with it.

Column: 1628

To develop a responsible cyberspace, all parties need to play their role responsibly. On its part, the Government had in the past set up the Parents Advisory Group for the Internet (PAGi) and National Internet Advisory Committee (NIAC) to promote a culture of cyber wellness, especially among our young and their parents. Today, the Media Development Authority (MDA) works with the Internet and Media Advisory Committee (INMAC), the industry, as well as NGOs like the Touch Community, to foster cyber wellness among our young people. In response to AIMS, the Government will set up an Inter-Ministry Taskforce on Cyber Wellness to coordinate national efforts and develop strategies and programmes on cyber wellness.

Significantly, netizens themselves have a major and critical role to play in developing a responsible cyberspace. Individual bloggers ought to be responsible and accountable in their postings. Website proprietors and the online contributors must be responsible and prompt in moderating the sites to ensure credibility, objectivity and balance in the content posted. Netizens can and should do more to establish and enforce the norms of acceptable online behaviour.

As the Government moves towards engagement in cyberspace, we hope that the online community, as well as those in the real world, will contribute constructive and meaningful ideas and comments to help strengthen Singapore and better prepare us for the rigours of global competition.

Miss Penny Low: Could the Senior Minister of State give some examples of events and incidents where netizens have acted relatively irresponsibly. And, in particular, in the light of the Member, Mr Seng Han Thong's recent incident where netizens voted quite unjustly to his event. What comments would the Senior

Column: 1629

Minister of State have regarding the netizens' behaviour?

RAdm [NS] Lui Tuck Yew: Mr Speaker, Sir, if I draw on the example given by the Member on the comments that have been passed after the Member of Parliament, Mr Seng Han Thong was injured, I think there were a small number of sympathetic comments expressing condolences and praising him for the work that he has done. And I am sure that the family and relatives would have drawn great comfort from reading these comments.

I would say that the vast majority of the comments were unhelpful. A significant number was unkind. A small number was downright outrageous. It was disappointing and my impression is that I do not think the community itself has done enough to rebut some of these unhelpful comments delivered by the fellow netizens. It is a squandered opportunity for a higher degree of self-regulation. It would have been an example of the genesis of the first steps towards a more responsible, a greater self-regulatory regime, but many of those responses were not rebutted nor answered, and I think it is not healthy for some of these to remain on the Internet unchallenged, unquestioned and unanswered.

Mdm Cynthia Phua (Aljunied): I am one of those who surf the Internet occasionally. Among my friends, some have noted that sometimes when they enter some of the sites, and try to put in positive comments in some of the political sites, these are not accepted. So how does Senior Minister of State ensure that for such websites, it is open to all, whether it is positive or negative comments?

RAdm [NS] Lui Tuck Yew: I do not think we want to establish a regime where we regulate and direct the

Column: 1630

proprietors of the sites to take measures where they have to accept all comments. Where people feel that they have and want to engage in a serious and meaningful debate, I think the Government will be prepared to engage them, and I have mentioned that we will do so on REACH and on the online sites of the mainstream media. Let us start with those areas. I would encourage all netizens who want to engage in responsible and meaningful debate with the Government, to move to these sites and we can engage them at these places.