Tuesday, May 13, 2008 0:36

Does S’pore deserve its press ranking?

In Guest Writers, Media Watch • 2,661 views • 11 Comments

Terence Lee

In a 2008 survey by Freedom House, Singapore has shown no improvement in its freedom of the press, despite the maturing of online media as a medium to air alternative views.

The latest results reveal nothing new: much has already been said about the deplorable state of press freedom in Singapore, ranked a lowly 153rd out of 195 countries, sharing the same ranking as Iraq. The idea that Singapore is first-world in economic competitiveness but third-world in press freedom and civil liberties has already become an over-sung tune.

A check with Freedom House’s past survey results revealed that Singapore has not only been stagnating, but has in fact deteriorated in terms of press freedom, increasing from a score of 60 (the lower the score, the freer the press) in 1994 to 69 in 2008.

Singapore occupies the lower rungs with many third-world countries like Iraq and Afghanistan, and lags far behind many of her ASEAN neighbours like Indonesia (114th) and Malaysia (141st) as well.

While widely quoted in the media, this information has often been accepted without much scrutiny. This inevitably leads to the question: does Singapore really deserve such a ranking?

It is debatable whether this assessment accurately portrays the actual situation on the ground. While the survey appears to measure only “press freedom” in Singapore, it should more accurately be described as measuring “media freedom.” A look at the assessment methodology reveals that the evaluation criteria encompasses not just print but all of news media – from newspapers to television to the internet.

There is no doubt that Singapore is beset by laws that continue to hover ominously over the media. The Government continues to pull its strings: mostly dormant and behind the scenes, but still largely in control. Therefore, a widespread change in the media’s stance from compliance to self-assured independence is highly unlikely.

However, in spite of all the restrictions, journalism in Singapore has found a way to grow somewhat, riding on the wave of the Internet revolution. The journalism scene in Singapore today is certainly more vibrant than it was in 1994.

Competition

While The Straits Times’ bias has not changed much, much around it has changed. It faces more competition from TODAY, which promises “meaningful journalism” with a different perspective. While unable to deviate too far from the state’s dictum on the press, TODAY has offered a refreshing change of pace for press-weary Singaporeans with its more engaging writing style. Also, its commentaries on the Weekend Xtra edition also provides more diverse views that are much different from The Straits Times.

Furthermore, the Internet has forced the Government’s hand in allowing more deviant views to proliferate. It has realised that it cannot exert tight control over the Internet. As a result, opposition parties, bloggers, political activists and citizens have used the Internet to air their views and organise political activities. An example of the former would be Martyn See’s political films, some of which are banned in Singapore, but nevertheless still available on YouTube.

Growth impeded by state’s legislation

The end result? A more accurate picture of the general sentiment of Singaporeans, with the views in the mainstream media balanced out by those in alternative media. The effects of the Internet on the overall political sentiment of the populace are still unknown, however. Only in the next General Elections will we know whether a vocal and politically-active minority can influence the slumbering majority. By then, citizen journalism in Singapore would have matured some, and perhaps capture a wider audience.

The Government has promised changes to Internet regulations, and the blogosphere has responded by sending in its proposal. Any changes to legislation would be slow and steady, and this will be an issue of much interest to political watchers here. Nevertheless, the signs inevitably point towards more press freedom, but it will be a painstakingly-slow process.

However, true growth of journalism here is impeded by the state’s legislation. Unless the government introduces sweeping reforms to legislation like the Internal Security Act and the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act, don’t expect the state to rank any higher in next year’s edition of the survey.

Singapore and Iraq?

On the other hand, coming back to Singapore’s ranking in the Freedom House survey, it can also be argued that Singapore does not deserve to be ranked so lowly, with the same score as Iraq. Iraq seems to be in a worse situation – the nation remains an extremely dangerous place for journalists, and not just because it is a nation at war.

Besides laws limiting press freedom, Iraq has gone a step further by acting against the media. The Freedom House report mentions how “Sunni TV channels Al-Zaura and Salah al-Din, as well as the Dubai-based satellite channel Al-Sharqiya were closed down in late 2006 and early 2007 for airing footage of Iraqis protesting Saddam Hussein’s execution.” Furthermore, it was reported that “eleven employees of Wasan Media were arrested…for sharing video footage with Al-Jazeera of an interview with a woman who was allegedly raped by police.”

In the report, it was also mentioned that 42 journalists and media professionals were killed in 2007. Most of them were killed by insurgent groups and militias in Iraq. One example would be Sahar Hussein Ali al-Haydari, a female reporter who was shot down by 4 gunmen on June 7 from an Al-Qaeda affiliated group.

Surely a case can be made for Singapore here? While laws are in place to safeguard the state’s interests over freedom of speech, and heads of state have engaged in lawsuits against the International Herald Tribune and the Far Eastern Economic Review, no journalists have been known to be arrested or killed.

With that much said, perhaps we should not be too happy about the relative comfort that journalists here enjoy. The peace enjoyed here may not be a sign of health, but instead a deeper malaise.

As Frederick Douglass, an American statesman once said: “If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favour freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without ploughing the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning.

Read also Terence’s roundup of the new media scene in 2007:

——————–

About the author: Terence Lee is a 1st year student at NTU School of Communication & Information. He is an aspiring journalist with an interest in public affairs and social issues. More of his works can be found in his blog at http://themadmadworld.blogspot.com.

——————–

Related posts:

  1. Why I prefer Canada’s education system – world-ranking or not
  2. “We deserve prosperity and emancipation” – Kenneth Jeyaretnam
  3. “Non-vulnerable” deserve a chance at pay-out
  4. S’pore press freedom ranked 133rd – MP says this shows “our press remains credible” !
  5. Singaporean activists mark World Press Freedom Day 2008



11 Comments

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

PAPer
May 15, 2008 3:49

You have to be careful here about the press freedom index since this may be based on perceptions/biases by western reporters.

In any cases, there is hardly any worthy news to report in Singapore since the Internet has so many more interesting stories.

Kelvin Quee
May 20, 2008 0:26

Terence,

> Iraq seems to be in a worse situation – the nation remains an extremely dangerous place for journalists, and not just because it is a nation at war.

You have confused “press freedom” with “working conditions”. Clearly, with an US-installed govt in Iraq, you would expect legislations and political inclinations to have a free press.

Whether reporters are fired at or served as “collateral damage” is irrelevant to the measure of “press freedom”.

Have the TOC editors vetted this article before putting it up?

matt
May 21, 2008 4:34

Can people stop raising the that stupid point about Western media bias? If we take a good hard look at the west we will find that it is no more or less monolithic than ‘Asian’ media.

You’ll also find that there are very few TV shows in which politicians come in to be interviewed and grilled about government policy by broadcast journalists. The media doesn’t try to hold the government accountable, and when it does criticise, it does so within vaguely defined ‘OB markers’.

Lets face it, Singapore deserves its press ranking because its mainstream media is tightly controlled. It doesn’t ask the government difficult questions, and is serves a different function – that of helping the govenrment govern, rather than checking it. This function is recognised by the PAP. The PAPer, the PAP doesn’t pretend that there’s press freedom, it merely says that in Singapore, the press should perform a different function, because they are not elected, and if set free, will get in the way of governance.

The question is more an issue of whether the PAP’s press model is desirable

Terence
May 22, 2008 9:56

No, press freedom and working conditions are not the same thing, but they are intertwined. Poor press freedom equals poor working conditions, in the journalistic sense.

While legislation in Iraq does guarentee some form of freedom for the press, there are still restrictions. As quoted from Freedom House’s report on Iraq:

“Legal analysts have noted that some archaic laws dating from Saddam Hussein’s rule remain on the books, including restrictive insult, antidefamation, and state secrecy legislation.”

Besides such legal wranglings, journalists there have to deal with sectarian violence, not to mention terrorists who are more than happy to pump bullets into them.

Nevertheless, despite the relative peace in Singapore, that does not mean that the press here is healthy. I hinted at that towards the end of my article.

And yes, TOC has vetted this article.

bluey
May 28, 2008 5:21

The news is there but we have educated people who know how to twist words to create a desired perception.
Maybe that’s why i feel smart negetively interpreting our newspaper’s “former-army-general-approved” remarks.

Silencer
May 29, 2008 8:35

In a democracy, a press serves to function of accurate reporting in order to keep the Government in check, and as a means to the people of a democracy to obtain free and true information.

A press which cannot question the objectives, intentions and ideals of the Government, and has many former Government Servants in high profile positions in its editorial team is really no press at all.

qwerty
May 31, 2008 4:08

Today newspaper provides more diversity in views? You are talking about the same newspaper that sacked Mr Brown? Terence what planet are you from?!

PCL
Jun 18, 2008 22:41

Singapore has alot of top ranking records and those people related to these records are proud of it. This low ranking in press freedom will not shake them from their objective. The Press holding still enjoy record earning yearly and the people related still gets their salary end of the day.

From the perception of this country, top ranking in talent or economic generating related spots will be their priority, unless Press freedom will one day be a related issues.

Chew
Jun 19, 2008 11:08

Singapore’s newspaper, the Straits Time, is not a newspaper at all. It is more like a PAP’s newsletter.

T
Jun 27, 2008 13:57

“Does S’pore deserve its press ranking?”

Certainly not!!!

153rd out of 195 countries is too flattering. 188th sounds about right.

Bryan
Nov 30, 2009 12:29

To truly deserve its press ranking we need to see another newspaper even in an online format to challenge SPH in terms of views. Its how high you set the bar and currently the bar isn’t set very high.

Leave a Reply

Comment


theonlinecitizen on Facebook