Arixion / Youth Writer
It has been two months since the Advisory Council for the Impact of New Media on Society (AIMS) released its report. Its report was standard government fare except for a major point that has got everyone talking: the need for the government to engage netizens on their own turf.
A number of netizens wonder what the aim of MICA in convening AIMS was. The more extreme of them – at Sammyboy and Sintercom – believe that this is a conspiracy by ISD and MICA to conquer the last free space in Singapore – the Internet. As for MICA, the banning of podcasts during the last General Elections stirred up considerable ire amongst netizens.
Even those who are not “into” podcasts find the mechanism of MICA somewhat outdated. Only the maverick component of “Arts” saves MICA from becoming a replica of Ministries of Information in countries like Israel, Saudi Arabia and China. Information Ministries cut off “undesirable” information. How is “undesirable” defined? Some aspects, such as pornography and hate speech, are clear, but others – like party political broadcasts– are a grey area.
Make MICA independent
The best way for the government to show its sincerity towards e-engagement – and no, P-65 bloggers just don’t cut it – is by granting independence to MICA.
The newly-independent MICA should also absorb a number of other government offices: The Elections Department (ELD), the Registry of Societies, the Registry of Births, the Registry of Deaths, the Registry of Marriages, SingStat and Reach.
On Censorship
Does this sound too extreme? Here is why it is not:
Daily inflow of new information is too high. The only way for traditional censorship to work is by instituting increasingly coarse-grained categories. However, these categories prevent dialogue on new concepts by reinforcing societal prejudices e.g. homophobia.
As categories become wider, the temptation to flout the rules is greater. I remember my friends screening the Passion of Christ (M18/R21) during recess in secondary school.
There is more likely to be unjust censorship when categories are wide. Remember the furore over the lesbian scenes initially cut out from The Hours on grounds of public morality?
What E-Engagement Really Is About
Information Management, in its traditional sense, is becoming less feasible to implement. In the Information Age, information management will be less about restricting the flow of information, and more about redirecting the flow of information through appropriate channels.
The role of an agency like MICA should be to aid in the networking and linking of information sources, rather than block out “undesirable” sources, especially political commentary. Blocking political commentary creates the dangerous situation where the elite gets increasingly distanced from the ground. What results is a façade of peace and happiness covering a simmering mass of resentment, waiting to blow up.
The government seems to classify political comments into three categories: the “official” comments in the print media like The Straits Times and Zao Bao, the grumblings at coffee-shops and of taxi-drivers, and online commentary. The first group the government endorses and at least gives an ear to. Whether it provides active response is another question. It ignores the second group. It has traditionally ignored the third group, but the AIMS study has elevated the position of the third group.
Playing the national interest card, and subject to government intervention, Singapore’s traditional media have tended to shy away from direct criticism of the government. The few journalists and contributors who attempted that were summarily removed from their posts. The most recent individuals were Michael Backman (TODAY) and blogger Mr Brown (contributed to TODAY). When one reads editorials in the local papers, one gets the sense that they criticise everybody but our government officials, who are usually quoted as if they give sage advice. The result is that the first group creates an unrealistic confidence in the government.
Members of the second group are individuals who view policies from the prism of their own lives. They are overlooked because they supposedly lack the big picture that the first group is argued to possess. However, it is precisely because they speak from real life experience that makes them worth listening to, and their sentiment would be an accurate gauge of sentiment on the ground.
AIMS recognized members of the third group as people with valid concerns. The traditional pre-AIMS view of the online population was a cacophony of voices in cyberspace, or mainly comprising grouchy middle-class youth. Perhaps that was an accurate description in 1998, but within the last decade the makeup of the cyberspace population has drastically altered. Senator McCain is not the only senior citizen in the world with a web presence.
E-engagement is not really about engaging a new group of people – this is one of AIMS’ mistakes – but about trying to engage a group of people who have always been existent, but been continually sidelined by the traditional approach to information management.
Restructuring Our Information Management Apparatus
This is where the rest of the assembly comes in.
Firstly, we have REACH, the re-named Feedback Unit. Aligning REACH under an independent MICA would enable it to better facilitate active dialogue between government and citizens. Netizens and other citizens would better respect the objectivity of an independent agency. The agency itself would also be able to police the quality and availability of feedback replies, so that events such as the recent Herb Garden incident would not occur.
Secondly, we have SingStat and the Registries. Given our government’s overwhelming dominance in most political sectors, giving SingStat official freedom will provide it with a higher degree of credibility.
The role of the Registries is record-keeping. By divorcing the Registry of Societies from the executive arm of government, it can untangle its bureaucratic function from the political arena: register all Societies first, and then leave it to the politicians to decide if they should be de-registered.
Thirdly, we have the Elections Department (ELD). The ELD would gain much more local and international credence if it were an independent agency, rather than a sub-department of the Prime Minister’s Office. It could maintain a level playing field without bothering about partisan obligations.
Out of Elections, the new ELD can also dedicate time to educating the public about representative democracy. (For instance, how about having the ELD run student council or prefectorial elections?)
Beyond the above, an independent variant of MICA would give individuals and NGOs access to the legislative branches (parliament) and the executive branches (cabinet and ministries) of the government, as well as to each other.
Conclusion
These are certainly radical ideas, but the end of product of their implementation will be enhanced national pride, an end to our classic political apathy, and the aligning of our societal institutions to the new forms of the Internet Age.
————-
About the author:
The writer is currently in National Service. He was formerly from Raffles Institution and Hwa Chong Insitution (College Section). He fancies himself a seasoned armchair critic. (He prefers the sofa though.)
——–
Related posts:
- Don’t govern the Internet with Old World methods
- Liberalising the Films Act? Teach Media Literacy too
- New faces watching new media
- Was Minister Lui Tuck Yew confused by AIMs’ recommendations?
- The Online Media: Untangling Singapore’s web of politics
Hardly extreme, and this is probably the most rational article I ever read (so far) in TOC Youth Focus. Keep up the good work!
Thx Donald! I was beginning to wonder if people were keeping away from my first article or something. But ya, thanks for the praise. To me, it is extreme since to implement it would probably involve a constitutional amendment. But well, I will keep the alternative policies flowing! Haha!
Hello Arixion. I’ve seen you around on the MIN DEF forums. Nice read.
The newly-independent MICA should also absorb a number of other government offices: The Elections Department (ELD), the Registry of Societies, the Registry of Births, the Registry of Deaths, the Registry of Marriages, SingStat and Reach.
Whoa! Hold on! Are you suggesting that all these departments will come under MICA? Already, I felt MICA has a dichotomous role: information and arts. While there are overlaps, I do think they are quite separate.
All these statistics department and registries can be banded together as an independent ministry, but they should not go under MICA. And certainly not the ELD. I think ELD should be an independent department of its own.
Jackson,
Well Ok, I used the name “MICA” so I wouldn’t sound too radical. Probably, “National Information Management Agency” would be better. On arts, did you notice that the proposal doesn’t include anything on the NAC or else? My idea would be to make arts run totally from NGOs that are linked to the government through Liaison Officers in MICA. Sadly, not enough words to write all that in.
The Stats Dept and Registries are cardinal information recording agencies, so I don’t really get why they don’t fit under a Ministry of Information.
As for the ELD, polls are a means of information gathering too, and are a form of feedback. But more importantly, the ELD needs to be under a government agency or quasi-governmental agency to have access to funds to run. The new “MICA” is not really our traditional MICA any longer; if you really wanted to take it to penultimate point, it is a fourth branch of government that can stand independently alongside the legislative, executive and judiciary, providing a much-needed counter-balance especially to the executive.
Rgds,
Arix
Actually, a good idea would be to create an independent media depository run by the community, to collect every news article and government reports relating to public policy and local politics.
I am acutely aware of how MSM like to sweep PAP’s failures under the carpet and tell us to move on while MSM constantly paints the Loyal Opposition in a bad image.
MSM also doesn’t report any Loyal Opposition activity, unless it is a direct engagement between the Loyal Opposition and the ruling party. As a result, it appears to the general public that many Loyal Opposition political parties are doing nothing.
For example, there was no publicity on MSM for WP’s Youthquake Forum that took place in August 2008.
We need something a little more powerful than a mere depository, I think… We need a new framework for the local media and feedback agencies to work in, in particular. Especially for the internet, we need something that will liberalize it maximally.
We need a new framework for the local media and feedback agencies to work in, in particular. – Arix
Yes, we need a new framework, but the likelihood of a new framework is close to zero. Taking a more practical approach, a community-run independent media depository is more likely to work.
smallvice,
Yep, I admit the likelihood is nadir … at the moment. But we technically have some infant community media repositories already. For instance, Melanie Hlewitt’s SGReview. Anyway, the problem with repositories is that they are passive. We shouldn’t just store information; information is only useful if it is actually used.
And I tried to check out YouthQuake, but apparently WP didn’t even publicise the event on its own website even. The only YouthQuake I managed to google was a concert in Alabama, USA.
Rgds,
Arix
Donaldson,
See why my suggestion is extreme now?
Rgds,
Arix
Good piece and some good suggestions.
I’d like to point out though that the idea of devolving information management to an independent agency is good in theory but may not work in practice.
Firstly, info management has already been devolved away from MICA to the Media Development Authority (MDA). It is in the MDA that is where the censors and all those hardworking “information managers” work. MDA does have some autonomy, but not as much as you would probably like.
What you are probably asking for are independent “commissions”, e.g., an Elections Commission, etc. I agree that this is a good thing, but from the example of countries like Bangladesh which also have “independent” elections commissions, things aren’t necessary that way in practice.
So even if we were to have an independent Info Management Commission, you can bet they will be as independent as Temasek is from the Government.
Mr Giam,
I appreciate your comments. And like I said, my suggestions are ‘extreme’. (Meaning that they are not practicable for as long as the PAP remains in power.)
I am unclear however on how the MDA is a devolution away from MICA; I thought MDA was a sub-department of MICA? By the way, I used the word “agency” to sound more “politically correct” (in case anyone from MICA or Straits Times was surfing this post). As I explained to Jackson further up in this conversation, what I am really envisioning in the penultimate is a sort of formalised “fourth estate”, complete even with its own electoral or nomination process- possible since it will contain the ELD itself (plus a few other surprises which merit their own articles).
However, to be practical as smallvice urges us to be, even a Temasek Corp situation is preferable; then people can start twisting more arms from there.
And although I need more words (and time) to fully elaborate, the idea of autonomy is much more than just autonomy from the government (though that is a significant part). There are other societal factions we need to take note of. The principle of autonomy is to keep this “fourth estate” free from the control of the government and all other political and non-political factions, while allowing each group its own fair say.
The most important part is – although it is not expressly mentioned – I am not asking for a new Act or Executive Order (We have that, right?), but an addition of a new section to the Constitution. Not achievable in the short-term, but I just want the idea to sort of float around until the opportunity comes.
Rgds,
Arix