We must adapt ourselves to it, and use it to educate and engage our cyber-citizens.
- Home
- Blogs & Sites
- Moderation
- TOC Store
- Vision, Mission & Core Values
- Join Us!
- Contact Us
- Privacy
- RSS
All rights reserved. Singapore Wedding Videography and Photography | Cream Pictures
I wonder if this means that he’s worried about how the internet helped create a political sunami in Malaysia recently.
This doesn’t sound good. The Straits Times has been revamped just yesterday, indicating a concerted push into the internet to engage and “educate” Singaporeans.
“Educate” ? PAP style is to make you lose your pants if you say things that cause them discomfort, never mind if it is the truth.
JBJ , Francis Seow, Tang LH, Chee SJ were educated indeed !
The stubborn one like Chia Thye Poh needed 32 years of house arrest education.
Lee Jnr should know better. He did receive some education from papa.
At this moment,
Lee Jnr. and his cabinet need to be educated on nation building if they are serious about it.
Ho Ching needs to be educated on economics and financial investments, and not to take on a job that is beyond one’s ability.
The bloody lot from the PAP needs to be educated on the meaning of integrity, transparency, accountability, empathy, cronyism, nepotism, sense of fairness, sense of shame and honour.
Come back to cyber space when you PAP members and your ball-carriers have learnt all these !
The PAP can control many aspects of my life but they cannot control my thoughts !
Here is a netizen’s National Day educational message for Singaporeans on the appropriate meaning to all these multi-million priced titles.
MM = Megalomaniac Minister
SM = Sedated Minister
PM = Pathetic Minister
DPM = Deficient Proven Minister
Thanks to TOC and others, the ruling party is stimulatingly aroused by the posted opinions and finds it necessary to engage in cyber terrorism to educate and engage our cyber-citizens.
Perhaps our dear PM Lee really meant in uttering the phrase “engage our cyber citizens” is to seek these people out and neutralise them before they can pose any threat to the PAP.
When people are starting to see the light.
Lee Hsieng Loong is trying to cover the Sun.
Well he can go engage all but Pinkie, Ring, Index and Thumb.
If I am not wrong, there are deeper meanings than seen on the surface. To me, most important is “to understand what is not said”
Additional comments:
Be careful of “throwing smoke”, what I learnt during NS.
From sending in “anonymous counter-insurgents” to “educate and engage cyber citizens”, it’s an improvement.
But still, what does the PM mean by “educate”? Is there going to be a National Education programme for netizens? Oh dear….
No need for the PAP to interfere, cyber citizens educate each other, looking at issues from different angles.
The PAP leadership should be more concerned about themselves because they are the ones who have a direct impact on the people.
Is it possible to educate a 84 yr old incorrigible fool to stop interfering and retire gracefully ?………..only when he goes to his grave !
Can a spineless PM educate himself to be a more convincing leader ?…….for a high level of leadership one needs to be born with certain traits.
From observations of the people we get in the cabinet and parliament, the ruling party without a doubt needs to be educated on the selection process !
PRESUMPTIOUS even on the eve of National Day celebration; no let off.
“When will they ever learn ?
Where have have all the flowers gone, long time passing.
When will they ever learn ? When will they ever learn?”
Sadness in Beijing
He means deploying the state propaganda machinery into cyberspace! you fellas gonna get a huge big constant flood of hogwash and eyewash a la the MSM! It will be the new National Education series.
Except that when we respond, no MSM can hold up or censor us. Let’s engage them and show up their true colors as the hollow men!
And as usual his speech… impartial, impersonal, and non-obligatory as all orevious years…
Adapt to it, educate and engage? Open up system progrssively?
I think he meant tightening their grip across cyber society here….
well, try blocking out the sun why don’t he..?
Netizens need to be “educated” to accept:
1. Million $ salaries for Ministers, even when they are incompetent
2. why it’s ok for Ho Ching for President
3. PAP=only capable party for govt=Singapore
4. Opposition=unnecessary risks=chaos=lunacy=loss of investments
5. Democracy=1 man 1 vote every 4 years=PAP free to do as please in between
6…..
Please add..
He said: “… We will evolve our policies and rules, our economy and society, to take full advantage. We will continue to open up our system progressively.”
I am more focussed on the words “take full advantage”.
I personally interprete it that instead of being affected negatively by the internet, they are using and shall use it to win more votes.
Who bought Hardware Zine?
Talking about internet, in an unrelated incident, I like to tell you how powerful the spyware can be. It prevented my friend from using his pc completely and he had to reformat! He later realise his identity is stolen and credit card info also stolen.
internet is spyware and more! spywares are scumbags of the internet.
Not only did they bought Hardware Zone. What do you think Red Nano is for ?? And what do you think, before Red Nano was officially announced/launched, PM visited Yahoo HQ and was pictured together with Jerry Yang in the shittimes??
And I can add, its my speculation – I believe we are the one of the relatively large customers of Cray Supercomputers!!!
Yah, reminds me when SM was PM…
Discussions there were, decisions – they were foregone……..
Opening up ended with closing up with a tight fist …. and today is good time to look back on many things – how are MPs & Ministers & President selected ? how are top salaries really justified ?
How are CEOs selected in NKF ( under the MOH ?), why FTs everywhere ? (where are the Singaporeans?)……..Why scholarships given to foreigners ?
This is a positive development. It is positive that the Government recognises the useful of the Internet as a medium to educate and engage the citizens.
Let us adopt a positive apporach and help the Govenrment through this difficult process. If they try to use the Internet to educate and engage the citizens, they will also be more exposed to a greater field of ideas and opinions, and they may be better educated themselves.
In the past, the news to the top leaders are “filtered” by people who like to convey the good news. Even the mainstream media are constrained in what they can say.
The Internet allows a wider group of people to express their views, without the constraints. If the leaders realise how strongly people feel about certain issues, they may modify their policies.
I wish to suggest how we can give our views:
1. Express our view honestly; be constructive and fair
2. Use our real names
3. Do not pass judgement on other people’s views
4. Be polite and civil
5. Do not be defamatory. Do not label people unfairly.
.
Use our real names? Really?
So much for anonymity on the Internet. Why is there a need to know who we are when we type? Does typing with a fake name make an argument less valid?
To Mr KL Tan:
Mr Tan, I detect you are optimistic, trying to stand the middle ground, non-adversary etc. Please let me know if I am wrong, yea.
The MSM was, and is controlled. So there is NO Way to allow the internet be controlled ( I dont know how this can be done honestly). And we have to pay 80cts to read controlled info (only info related to, and affecting Sgp).
Of course, we need to be non-judgemental etc and agree somewhat with what you mentioned.
But , a BIG but, … ‘hoping’ you said – you wait long long.
Lets be realistic (as opposed to optimistic and hopeful) – realistic of this statement often times quoted “we have a system that works” for them and tweaked by them, not because of you and me…
To Meli-go-lound
I express my views clearly on many social and economic issues. Many of my views are are not “middle ground”.
I can express my views without attacking other people, or passing judgement on other people. I respect other peoples views, if they are honest views.
I encourage people to express their views using their real names, so that the views can be more credible. I do not like people attacking other people under the “cloak of anonymity”.
I had to face a situation where the person attacking me anonymously was not expressing his personal view, but was paid by other people to attack me. This is how bad the situation can become under “freedom through anonymity”.
I believe that we have to be positive and optimistic in making change. It may take a long time, but it is likely to produce better outcome, than a negative approach.
I welcome peole to visit my blog and website:
http://www.tankinlian.blogspot.com
http://www.tankinlian.com
http://www.singaporepublictransport.blogspot.com
It is the message that is important and not the messenger.
There is no reason to put a real name to your post. It should always be optional.
The govt has to be very patient and work incredibly hard to win the trust of the netizens.
Their past deeds make netizens wary and cautious !
It is imperative for the govt to be honest with themselves. They have yet to admit to numerous mistakes or even acknowledge that many issues could have been handled better.
Until they do so, the trust from the people will always be elusive……….
….personally, this govt has to do something really special before I can trust them.
Each netizen has his/her own style when posting comments or rebuttals and TOC has been up to the mark in moderating comments. I believe we are doing just fine……..even when TOC staff took a few days break , all comments were civil.
Nobody took advantage of the situation.
Does anyone also feel that many of the posts to forum too offensive, judgmental, and anti-PAP? I find that there are many comments which attack persons (almost always the PAP) and not issues.
Are there also readers in the background who feel the same as me?
#24
Yes I am in agreement with you.
But there is nothing to be ashmamed nor one feel apologetic about it, as what these people write mostly are facts (well facts that is to them, why not) if not justified comments.
You mean the pappies are always justified in wht they do (Mask selamat affair, traveller clear immigration with diff passport. Of course you will say humans make mistakes, no one is perfect blah blah blah).
Do you think our controlled papers would even allow,lets say, a 10% of what is written here to be published or merely quoted, to be published by them??
And dont forget its free here, whereas you have to buy the controlled papers to read controlled info and treat you like a robot which you might be happy to be).
Lastly may I ask what is too offensive, judgemental, and anti PAP? If you measure your answers with the controlled papars, in the same vein of others writing against the PAP I doubt you will have same set defintions.
In conclusion, you may be aware, by and large, TOC citizens are not ANTI-SINGAPORE that is the PARAMOUNT BEHAVIOUR why, for example, Leong, Andrew, Kin Lian etc etc bother to sacrifice their time, reputations etc to contribute (and dont forget, people like Leong, I believe has to do a fair bit amount of research before he every time he writes.
Take this page for example, There are both sides to the coin, but the positive side is under-represented here.
Only Mr. Tan Kin Lian expressed the optimistic side. I am even wondering that had someone posted his message instead, would the author be bashed.
There are labels such as “Megalomaniac” and “Sedated”, harsh words like “bloody lot”, and blanket judgments like “incompetent” and “hollow”.
If most discussion are zealous attacks on people, this forum not only becomes a waste of effort from people like Mr. Tan, but also casts a negative image on its contributors.
This govt has not been taking the citizens’ views seriously and for many decades ! Their past and present deeds show them up as lacking in principles which many citizens expect of leaders. And rightly so. I personally find it extremely hard to deal with people you cannot trust…..especially people who never admit to mistakes…..it is the first clue to a person’s integrity ! Does not matter how talented he or she is.
The frustration of netizens is understandable and I am one person who believes this govt ONLY takes notice of robust comments and rebuttals. The IBAHRI report is a friendly advice to this govt to do some introspection. But look at the self denial and the manner in which this govt responded. Can anyone recall this govt openly admitting to mistakes , mishandling of issues, overreacting to situations ? It all adds up to such a magnitude that they need to compare with our poor neighbouring countries as a way out to still look good. LOL
I hope TOC will continue to understand that not all netizens can be prim nd proper in the way they put their message across. TOC has been reasonable in moderating comments and should not be made to feel guilty. At least I respect the fact that you guys are doing some introspection.
I had a long chat with someone who stood against the PAP in the recent general election.
He asked for my opinion about the future of Singapore. Will there be greater diversity of views? Will there be check and balance? Can there be a Singapore, other than the PAP? Is there any point to encourage more people to stand up as an alternative against the PAP?
It was difficult for me to give my views constructively. It is one thing to oppose the current PAP policies, but one has to be convinced about the alternative.
I shared with him, the following aspirations:
1. A fairer society
2. A fairer deal for the weaker members of society (who are now exploited)
3. A role for the public sector to balance the private sector
4. People in the public sector does not need to be paid like the private sector
5. More active regulation to prevent the excesses of the private sector
6. A better distribution of powers, like the US political system.
I believe that people should be informed or educated about an alternative approach, other than the competitive, meritocratic, pro-business approach adopted by the PAP. Life is not just business. It is more than business.
I am drawing inference from the original comment from the government :
“We must adapt ourselves to it, and use it to educate and engage our cyber-citizens.”
I am fully in agreement with the previous response that our cyber medium is both a way for us (cyber citizens, or public) to be educated, as well as for us to educate them. Unfortunately, I do not see a balanced view taken in the government comment because it did not indicate the medium would be used for the government to get educated.
The non-superficial and true engagement built on mutual trust from both ends (govt and people) has some way to go.
I find hostile remarks hinder civilized, constructive, and well-rounded discussions. Also, TOC only allows the editors to start discussion topics. Due to these 2 reasons, some voices and issues may have been under-represented.
May I suggest:
1. Removing comments that contain impolite or judgmental remarks.
2. Allowing readers to start discussion topics like in an any online forum.
1. Removing comments that contain impolite or judgmental remarks
Gerald, why not you set up your website and create your own rules – and provide a link here.
Language itself is beautiful and whether comments / posts are terms as impolite or judgmental remarks is itself a matter of interpretation (e.g judgemental ?) Since when one is not being judgemental when taking certain action. That also includes your above post suggesting / influencing change.
TOC is popular in its own right as it has worked hard to create for itself certain special attraction & characteristics – judging from some respectable people coming into this site and leaving comments.
There are definitely many platforms outside TOC which caters to sterile & non-judgemental comments / messages which are to your liking. However, TOC has given people the kind of special space where they can voice out their views / opinions truly in their hearts, perhaps not in the same grain as you would like to see.
Hi
I started the comment about “impolite and judgemental” views.
Here is what I mean:
> I avoid personal attack
> I present my view without attacking another person’s view
> I do not try to say that another person view is “wrong” (who am I to make this judgement)?
Dear Mr. Tan
Thank you for clarifying. You are a respectable man of great influence and we have to respect your rights to operate in certain strict parameters.
However not all people, especially common lay people, have the luxury of a mentality to exercise strict restrain given their very own social standing and positions in life. Usually, this gets manifested in their behind-the-keyboard comments which are genuine but may sound “inappropriately” aggessive at times.
I sincerely feel that the parameters currently operated by TOC are already strict enough yet acceptable allowing the kind of precious space available to people wanting to comment on their true feelings on national issues.
Hi Mr. Tan (#32),
I totally agree the 3 principles you have mentioned and also with your definition of judgmental as “saying another person view is ‘wrong’”. By judgmental views, I do not mean expressing views which are different from the PAP or the majority.
My main concern is under-representation and under-participation.
1. My 1st suggestion arises because harsh remarks (personal attacks, attacks on another person’s view, judgmental remarks) may have deterred more people from participating in discussions.
2. My 2nd suggestion arises because by allowing readers to start discussion topics (like many other online forums) more issues can be covered too.
There are many free open-source transparent online forums. If there is interest, I believe many readers would be willing to help do some search.
After procrastinating for a long time, I decided to take the risk of being stoned on the web. I am not a PAP diehard fan, but I have say that the options for the recent poll are incomplete.
The exact quote is “We’ll find a way to have more voices inside the assembly, but not at the risk of voting in a Division 2 or 3 Government” (MM Lee)
At face value, the quote says nothing about whether the economy will collapse if oppositions are voted in. The quote has the additional qualification of “Division 2 or 3″, i.e. weaker.
I definitely agree that there is an arrogant and negative connotation that oppositions are weak.
However, the poll does not give readers who think that a weak opposition could ruin the economy (which does not mean that all oppositions are weak) an option to vote.
The closest option is number 1, which degrades the reader to a person who merely selects that option just because MM Lee says so.
The poll is quoted below:
“Do you think Singapore’s economy will subside in 3 years if we vote in the Opposition to Government, as claimed by MM Lee?
* Yes, if MM Lee says it, it must be right.
* No, Singaporeans are resilient enought to weather even a bad government
* Singaporeans won’t be dumb enough to vote in a bad party to government”
Hi Just Another Singaporean (#33)
I understand your wish to have more freedeom to express your views. It’s okay. I don’t think that yyou will be barred from TOC, as many stronger views have been allowed through.
Hi Mr Tan (#28),
> I believe that people should be informed or educated about an alternative approach, other than the competitive, meritocratic, pro-business approach adopted by the PAP. Life is not just business.
Why do you think the meritocratic approach (which is impartial about race, language, religion, family background etc) is bad?
Could you write an article about it the future?
Thank you.
@Denis
Why do you think the meritocratic approach (which is impartial about race, language, religion, family background etc) is bad?
Meritocracy is not bad but it is far from adequate as a social philosophy in a society where the income gap is ever widening.
The one big flaw about meritocracy is that it fails to realize that every member of society have a different starting line in life. And studies have shown that the family background have a huge influence on the academic achievement and outcome of students.
One child has the means to have quality pre-school education and the parents do so because they are educated and well-off relatively. On the other hand, blue collar parents may not have the means or even idea of getting quality pre-school education for their child. Who is likely to enjoy a better edge when they enter the school system? Your guess will be as good as mine. Meritocracy doesn’t consider all these stuff.
Hi
Meritocracy is generally good, but when it is combined with the competitive, pro-business approach that creates the following negative outcomes:
> exploits the weaker members of society
> creates a highly stressful life
> leads to low birth rate
> creates uncertainty
> creates wide disparity of income
I will write more about it in a separate article.