Democracy and Elections: The Impact of Online Politics in Singapore
Monday, 15 September 2008, 8:25 am | 914 views
The current electoral system in Singapore is impervious to the impact of the internet.
James Gomez
Aim of study
The main goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of alternative online political content on Singaporean multi-party democracy. Ever since the internet became publicly available in Singapore in 1995, different activist groups have sought to use the medium in a bid to overcome the neglect, bias and censorship of the local mainstream media’s coverage of opposition parties.
These groups believed that if they used the internet to provide alternative political content, it might mitigate the censorship and bias in local mainstream media coverage of opposition parties especially during elections. This study is the first detailed analysis of the internet’s influence on voting patterns and electoral results in Singapore over a period of 12 years and three general elections (1997,2001, 2006).
Main findings of study
1. The internet is a niche platform for distributing alternative political content
The internet has emerged as a platform for civil society, opposition parties, international organizations and individual activists to produce and distribute alternative political content about the PAP government and politics in Singapore that would otherwise not be available on local mainstream media because of omission, bias or censorship.
The volume of such information and the innovation surrounding its production and distribution is mirrored by the rise in internet home penetration in Singapore during each election year. In 1997 it was 14%, in 2001 it was 57% and in 2006 it was 71%. The projections for 2011 is 86.66% and 2015 is 91.38%. The rising level of internet penetration projected for the coming years, further establishes that the internet will continue to be a significant medium through which alternative political content will be disseminated during and in-between elections.
Various statistical studies show that the internet as a source of political information remains low and predominantly confined to the young and educated. Thus far it has not been able to rival the local mainstream media’s domination position in the delivery of content. Hence, it remains a niche media, which is growing and will grow further in the next 10 years, but it will not be large enough to have mass outreach under the present circumstances in Singapore.
2. Alternative online political content has had no impact on voting patterns and electoral results
An analysis of elections results over 12 years covering the last three general elections (1997, 2001 and 2006) shows that there has been no change in the nett electoral results for opposition parties. Although the major opposition parties claim that the internet has helped boost membership and supporters and on occasions forced the local media to cover opposition party activities and statements, the findings of the research show that these have not translated in term of gains in parliamentary seats.
Further, in terms of the number of parliamentary seats contested (both single and group seats) and the number of candidates fielded by opposition parties there is no correlation between these numbers, use of internet by opposition parties and the availability of alternative online political content during and in-between elections. Similarly, there is no correlation between use of the internet by opposition parties and the availability of alternative online content and the percentage of votes cast for opposition parties.
Voter statistics show that since Singapore’s independence, the number of eligible voters has risen from 756,367 fro the 1968 elections to 2,158,704 in 2006. However, voters that have cast their ballots in contested electoral wards throughout all elections remain roughly around 55.7 percent. If we look specifically at the elections years 1997, 2001, and 2007, voter participation was 40.7%, 33.2% and 56.6% respectively (see Table 10). There is no correlation to the level of voter participation at each election in Singapore and the level of internet home penetration. Rather, the actual number of voters who cast their ballot at each election is directly linked to the total volume of voters registered in the wards that are contested during an election.
Conclusion
The evaluation of the reach of alternative online political contact and its impact on election results and voter statistics show that the primary shortcoming of Singapore’s present electoral system is the tendency to yield disproportionate representation in favour of the PAP. Over the last 12 years and through three general elections, when alternative online content was available during and in-between elections, it has had no effect on the PAP’s overall electoral results. While support for the PAP has fluctuated in the last four general elections (1991, 1997, 2001 and 2006) by 14.3 percentage points, the variation in percentage of seats was by 2.5 percentage points.
The evidence shows that the political structure, and in particular, the electoral system, rather than the availability of alternative online political content, accounts for the electoral outcomes in Singapore.
The current electoral system in Singapore is impervious to the impact of the internet. Hence, the freedom and ability to distribute alternative political content as a manifestation of voter sentiment will not lead to a change in electoral results. The study points to a need for electoral system reform to more accurately translate voter sentiment into parliamentary seats.
James Gomez: “Democracy and Elections: The Impact of Online Politics in Singapore.” PhD thesis, Monash University, Melbourne, 2008.
————–
Email this to a Friend
Bookmark this
RH:
1. Good study. Quoting Dr GOMEZ: “internet home penetration in Singapore during each election year. In 1997 it was 14%, in 2001 it was 57% and in 2006 it was 71%. The projections for 2011 is 86.66% and 2015 is 91.38%”. These numbers are probably obtained from MDA which was proved to be exaggerating to Look Good [2nd Aim of LIE KY govt]. Given the big numbers of very poor living in 1-room and 2-room or even 3-rooms, I believe that the current internet penetration is no more than ~60% and will never exceed ~70%. The high broadband charges by the monopolies further ensure low penetration. Further, owning a pc doesnt mean using it, especially to read politics. This doesnt mean we give up. Technology is changing so much so fast that mainstream media will be obsolete soon giving a chance for online to mainstream bigtime. All it takes is a simple new technology. New technologies appear so fast and become mainstream so fast we can bet on this. So, online activists, keep plugging away. You are far more effective than you think. ~4 years ago, there were no blogs. Now, every kid has 1. Dr GOMEZ study took so much time some of it may be obsolete. All LIE KY statistics are doctored to Look Good.
2. In your “An analysis of elections results over 12 years covering the last three general elections (1997, 2001 and 2006) shows that there has been no change in the nett electoral results for opposition parties.” This is due to massive and systematic cheating by LIE KY. Not only rigging the rules but also plain stuffing fake ballot boxes with fake PAP ballots — for proof, visit my blog. Thus, Dr GOMEZ should not equate failure in elections to failure of online advocacy. We are doing brilliantly online and driving LIE KY into a corner, only that he cheats and so continues to win elections.
3. Dr GOMEZ is doing valuable work and should be encouraged but his negative findings are at odds with what we onliners know and live.
In my opinion, regardless of any stuidy which is subjective and selective; whether it is the main stream media or the internet, what is important is the content and substance of the message. Informed voters in general will look into the issues presented and resolution proposed to make sound decision as to where their votes should go (provided they are given the opportuinites to cast their vote). Remember in Singapore, even if you are eligible voter, you may not even get the opportunity to cast your vote (the electoral system and zoning factor which has been highlighted by the author).
Certainly, one cannot deny the possibility that pro-gov main stream media will definitely play down or even deny any opposition’s right of response or counter response to any publications issued from the governing party that sort to discredit its opposition. This is a startling difference between the main stream media and the internet. Obviously one can also question the credibility of the contents in the internet. However, one cannot deny the fact that through the internet, it is the readers who will have the ultimate right to decide.
The essence of fair play general election in my opinion is to allow all contesting parties sufficient time (I think 3 months is fair and adequate), equal coverage to debate and present their case to its voters. Whether it is the main strream media or the internet or any other medium (barring from its availble fund that should strictly come from lobbying voter’s contribution). Until then can we say we have truly reached a pinnacle step in becoming a true democratic country.
There hasn’t been any correlation of any sort to anything with regards to election results.
The percentage of voters who voted one way or the other is the one that SHOULD correlate to election results. We all know how that worked out….
Three things:
1. Finding correlation with three data points (i.e. election results) is bullshit. It’s like trying to determine if a coin has a higher tendency of showing up heads or tails by flipping it only three times.
2. The fact that PAP gerrymanders is obvious. Don’t have to deliver a simple message with a flawed research report.
3. I doubt the plead to reform the electoral system is going to work. It’s probably better off to think about new win-win strategies.
I am in my 50s and I have only voted once in a general election sometime in 1980s. After that, the constiuencies that I stayed have all been under GRC and walkovers. I felt so cheated each time that I can’t cast a vote against the ruling party. When the MPs visited my neightbourhood I refused to meet them because I did not vote them. I think the problem is with the GRC system. A political reforms is good but at this moment who holds the majority in the parliament?
Democracy and Elections: The Impact of Online Politics in Singapore…
via the onlinecitizen.
The current electoral system in Singapore is impervious to the impact of the internet.
James Gomez
Aim of study
The main goal of this study was to evaluate the impact of alternative online political content on Singapo…
This paper highlights that newspapers should be deregulated.
“No person shall print or publish or assist in the printing or publishing of any newspaper in Singapore unless the chief editor or the proprietor of the newspaper has previously obtained a permit granted by the Minister authorising the publication thereof, which permit the Minister may in his discretion grant, refuse or revoke, or grant subject to conditions to be endorsed thereon.”
—Newspaper and Printing Presses Act of 1974, Cap. 206, Sec. 21.
> This paper highlights that newspapers should be deregulated.
Where is the logic?
Even if one believe in the conclusion of the flawed research that the electoral system should be changed because the internet is useless, how does it follow that newspapers should be deregulated?
(You can advocate deregulation of newspapers, but this does not follow from the argument in the above article)
Pie Kah 69 (#8): Firstly, this paper is a PhD thesis in which James Gomez was conferred a PhD for. The PhD thesis not only undergoes substantial fact checking at Monash University, but also academic reviews and an oral defence before the decision to confer a PhD is made. Contrary to your opinion, it is not flawed research.
Dr Gomez’s paper highlights that internet is a niche source of political information that is predominantly confined to the young and educated. It suffers from low readership and is not able to rival the local mainstream media’s domination position in the delivery of content. Hence, it is clear the next step forward would be deregulation of mass media. Currently, the Film Act has been loosened up to allowing making and showing of political films. What’s next thus must be deregulation of the print media newspaper.
While have some trust in our leaders and the system they created for the benefit of the people….ah hemmmm…..
I have an itch to know
if given a poll to ALL citizens as in ALL CITIZENS,
how many really approves the GRC system ?
Just an itch i have for a long time.
Maybe TOC can interview people on the streets with their faces mosaic’d , if they choose, to express their love for this kind of system or how they appreciate this kind of system , on youtube.
The reason for asking this is, I forgot was there news / tv report about this thing. Maybe TOC video or Mr Seelan can take the lead in this aspect.
I am sure many would appreciate this effort.
regards
Ho PinkPink
“we will never loose with the ….”
Electoral system reform. Isn’t this what JBJ and SDP have been saying for years????
Can James Gomez publish his whole thesis on the net ? It is best to read the result of his findings with detailed perspective and evidence. A lot of his words are taken out of context and only judge purely by abridged statements. It is naturally for many to denigrate his findings because some statements look generalised and deviate from local observation.
[...] don’t need no regulation - TOC: Democracy and Elections: The Impact of Online Politics in Singapore - TOC: Films of demos and assemblies approved by the authorities - No “partisan stuff” [...]
I don’t know what to make of this thesis. At one level it comes across as very believable. On another level. Even I can pick some bones with how the author uses statistics indiscriminately to illustrate his point. Although, I dont quite know how to put it across in paper.
I am not going to say, I agree or disagree with its findings. To be honest with you. I dont know how to judge it. Its true, it comes from a very respectable university, but I dont think that is a stamp of approval. Or is it? I dont know.
At such times, I do hope someone really smart and intelligent, like maybe eli diodati, the brotherhood people or even Dr Cherian George can lend their professional expertise to shed more light into what is said and to even offer a critique by dissecting its various parts. That I feel would make a more balance view, as it is, it’s hard to tell the trees from the forest.
Very hard.
Just my two cents
One unique feature of elections in Singapore and Malaysia has also been the ruling party’s post-independence bounce which has been steadily decreasing over the decades (and the exception of a SDP gifted boost) which also skews the results. Without the SDP campaign of opposition self destruction, trend analysis suggests that PAP votes could have fallen to 5X% in the last election.
Having said that, Mr Gomez’s finding is not a surprising conclusion. Ultimately despite the above, voters vote according to the impact on their lives to which the Internet is merely a medium.
There is a difference between being told that things are bad vis a vis actually feeling it. Malaysia is one example where crime, corruption and racial politics have had a decisive impact on people’s lives and accordingly on people’s votes.
However, it is not to say the Internet does not have an impact.
A single issue like siting a FW dormitory will have more impact on votes than a thousand blogs online. However, a thousand blogs online talking about it emphasize the issues. It amplifies the voice and concerns which in turn affect voter preference.
I seem to agree very much with the commentator in comment (14) where he said, he is unable to tell the forest from the trees. I too seem to suffer from the same sinking feeling. Something is amiss.
I don’t believe the internet does not have any impact on politics. It has in virtually every single country, without a single exception, so why should sg be any different?
I personally think only the brotherhood ppl can answer this question or perhaps another group who may have proven proficiency in numbers and put many of our thoughts and suspicion to rest.
The problem is they will also take Gomez to the cleaners. That may not be such a good thing. In that sense, I have to commend the brotherhood for staying well clear from commenting about J.Gomez’s thesis.
They are wise. As their leader once said, we take no sides politically. We are neutral. We are pick and choose our battles so that no one can make use of us politically or otherwise. We have to do this and if possible we try not to interfere when we see political parties trying to kill each other, its none of our business.
Great for James Gomez finally rounding up a ‘thesis’ so much to his heart leading to his doctorate. End of the day, although the internet represents a voice behind a curtain, real and fisical decision comes with the rule & heart when comes to voting.
Although the internet is at its best for communicating, learning, expressing or just simple fun, it has its dark shadows too. Although an ideal platform to reach the mass, it has its own undoings.
Simplicity is the essence for facts & figures to have any impact then pages & pages of facts & figures or for the matter thesis! Whatever positive outlook the internet may carry, till there is acredible opposition worthy of attention or discussion, the internet is best left minus a political platform!!!
Whatever the thesis says has to be validated by more detail, with theory bound by conditions and cirumstances. This generally apply to all thesis. It is impractical to generalise the world with just some statement and findings. For example, the political and technological environment of the country plays a important role.
Internet does affect the political scene but to what extend in Singapore given the reputation of senior old folk and regime who always proclaims themselves to be honest and credible, and give propaganda shit every in MSM. And is quite likely that people will ignore the internet due to negative remark by MSM on internet blog and commentary. Is MSM still the reckoning force in Singapore where it is the only sole printed state media ?
The pinkish clown once says “increase GST to help the poor ?” So what condition ? So we know that the condition is to rob Peter first than to pay Peter.
It just be the same with Gomez’s thesis. What conditions govern the theory in Gomez’s thesis ?
Until Gomez’s thesis is opened for all to read, it is hard to validate or invalidate his thesis. Thesis after all is just thesis that comes from analysis and observation, not the rule of nature or universe.
“17) V S RAAJ on September 16th, 2008 4.21 pm
Great for James Gomez finally rounding up a ‘thesis’ so much to his heart leading to his doctorate.”
Imagine if you are locked in a cave for so many years only hearing / staring whatever there was in the cave. One fine day, you come out of the cave, do you sincerely think that is not going to change a bit of how you perceive the outside world and especially on the person who locked you in the cave in the first place, not literally of course.
“I don’t know what to make of this thesis. At one level it comes across as very believable. On another level. Even I can pick some bones with how the author uses statistics indiscriminately to illustrate his point. Although, I don’t quite know how to put it across in paper.”
Well I know exactly what to make of your silly statement. What you may have just demonstrated to all here is how little you actually know about what a PhD thesis actually is. It’s a supposition of fact i.e a hypothesis, not to a statement of fact dumb dumb, so how is it supposed to prove or disprove anything? What the hell are you talking about?
Besides why should he post his thesis to establish a point for the benefit of anyone here or anywhere else? Tell me do you splay out the pictures of your girlfriend in the net for all to see? That’s really a private matter between him and his assessors at Monash.
The way I see it the man ran a fair and square race and to shoot him down just because you didn’t bother to read broadly on what a PhD should or should not be simply says you are not a sportsman or even understand that word beyond its dictionary meaning.
I don’t want any part in this. We fight fair and square. We don’t tie our opponents up and expect them to go ten rounds. We don’t post or views and sand bag others who try to respond to them. This we do not do! That is simply not us.
As I said, from what I see the man ran a fair and square race and I don’t think anyone has any basis to question either his integrity or shed aspersions on the merit of his PhD thesis.
If you want to do that take it up with Monash directly, every thesis is open to public review. You mean, you didn’t know that?
Good evening
SD
“Besides why should he post his thesis to establish a point for the benefit of anyone here or anywhere else? ”
Gomez doesn’t have to but if he want us to understand which perspective he coming from, and help us see and understand from his point of view then it is his interest to educate us as much. Not that we are stupid but if we have to be objective. It is important to convince us as much as how his thesis stand. Same for government.
“If you want to do that take it up with Monash directly, every thesis is open to public review. You mean, you didn’t know that?”
Well, if Gomez could help to obtain the permission to view publicly or tell us the link to dowload the thesis, we will be glad.
Not all thesis can be obtained easily from university just by asking. Thesis can be requested to keep confidential and hence may not be subjected for public access. eg due to sensitive information of company, state, eg…
[...] Democracy and Elections: The Impact of Online Politics in Singapore. [...]