On 15 June 2009, a complaint letter was written to TODAYonline alleging that certain comments on The Online Citizen violated the Penal Code. The letter also implored the Media Development Authority to “look into the conduct of TOC’s moderators”.
We reproduce MDA’s reply below:
WE THANK Mr Lionel De Souza for his feedback on TODAYonline (“Website moderators failed to exercise moderation”, June 15) regarding the posts on The Online Citizen, pertaining to the article “Perdition and Sedition”.
The Media Development Authority (MDA) places a high premium on safeguarding against harmful and undesirable online content that could disrupt our religious harmony. At the same time, given the global and borderless nature of the Internet, we recognise that there are practical limitations to what legislation can do to regulate the Internet.
MDA has therefore adopted a pragmatic approach that emphasises industry self-regulation and public education in addition to a light-touch regulatory framework via the Class Licence Scheme.
Under this approach, Internet content providers and service providers are required to exercise their own judgment and discretion to ensure that their content and services comply with the Class Licence conditions and the Internet Code of Practice. Please refer to www.mda.gov.sg for details.
If the content breaches the Code, the content provider will be warned and given a chance to remove the content, and should the content provider fail to do so, MDA will not hesitate to take more serious action against the content provider.
Community self-regulation and public education are critical prongs in our strategy to ensure responsible use of media on the online platform. Hence, we encourage Internet users to make known their concerns to website administrators directly, should they come across objectionable content on their websites.
Yuvarani Thangavelu
Deputy Director (Licensing Policy)
Development Policy Media Development Authority
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
Hi theforgottongeneration #44,
All I am just saying is that The Catholic News is also a victim of Lionel De Souza’s writing. In this letter to The Catholic News, he wrote “As a Singaporean, I am proud of the Government’s unceasing efforts to promote religious and racial harmony that is sadly missing in many countries.”
To Lionel De Souza,
Grow up, LDS! Are you still in kindergarten?
We are all adults here, we have no place here for kids like you to whine or cry.
So buzz off, kid, go back home, find a doll or something to play with. If you prefer to suck egg do it privately; and don’t teach your grandpa how to suck eggs, because it was your grandpa who taught your pa the ‘hows’. But you learnt it all from your pa, right?
52) rwkc on June 25th, 2009 2.25 pm
No use wan. People can just communicate 1 way if they wanna.
1 Way meaning they tell you something like published via MSM, and then, when someone rebuts with good reasoning, there is no law to say he need to entertain your rebuttals, unfortunately.
my sympathies.
LDS, LDS, where are you? ? ? ? ? ?
My only dislike about 1 way communications is that naive people like my nephew has been assuming that what is published is the truth or to be accepted.
I have been trying to change his mindset. i not sure how he got such a unintellectual mindset.
To TOC,
I wonder why the “comment box” for the thread “The Emperor’s new clothes” has been disabled/removed.
Because of the note TOC received from Lionel De Souza?
Because the discussions about metaphysics can lead to disharmony between the different religious groups?
Because of what?
Are we an “open-minded” or “close-minded” society?
“I have been trying to change his mindset. i not sure how he got such a unintellectual mindset.”
it will take time for him to settle down to some understanding as he slowly experiences through life. it is quite normal when the good things encountered by some lucky ones so far until now mirror nicely to what has been observed (preached by) in the public domain.
1 Way communication is for olden days and unintellectually satisfying nor convincing nor impressive nor a credible form of communication.
Why waste our time?
We should treasure every room for public discourse and not to regret till it was deprived because we violated the right given.
smallvice (#51),
That letter you linked to is far too demure. Surely you could have found a better one?
rwkc (#55),
No, the closure of the thread on “the Emperor’s New Clothes” has nothing to do with LDS’s letter.
I felt personally that the quality of discussion on that thread had gone down after Smallvice’s consistent “political” interference, and the tension between me and him, and that he was pushing the discussion too off-tangent.
After personal consultation with the Editor, we decided that the best option would be to close down the thread to further comments.
Rgds,
Arix
Hi Arix #59,
The bridge between the political sphere and the moral authority of a religious institution lies in the religious motivation of social institutions. To ensure that the moral authority of religious institutions ends in the political sphere, there has to be eternal vigilance to ensure this bridge remains dismantled.
41) smallvice585 on June 24th,
“….he most probably believe that if he posted his complaint in a TOC commentary thread, the moderators will remove his comment.”
This means LDS most probably does know what he is doing – the intent to malign or slander.
Lionel De Souza lack intellect and only good in ball carrying. He thinks that whatever printed on the Shit Times is right no matter how biased it is to the (PAP) government. How on earth Temasick Holding perform better than Warren Buffet when Temasick Holdings got constant capital injection from the Ministry of Finance and they can sell off National assets like Senoko Power, Power Seraya, Sinktel, etc for a huge profit and these GLC doesn’t cost much to acquire and build up.
Hi Rwkc #55,
You might like this TOC article written last June: Religion and the Right Not to Respect it. FYI. If you (plus Arix, Peter Sellers, Sllim and me) want to debate on this article, let’s do it on that thread. Let’s keep off-topic discussion on this thread minimal.
#59 Arix and
#63 smallvice585
Thank you both for your response.
Going forward, I would like to propose that if any message posted is thought inappropriate, the person holding such a view should institute a post addressed to the other participants concerned, explaining why he/she considered the message to be inappropriate, and then request for their the feedback or opinion. That way, even if we may not achieve full convergence, we should at least go along with the view of the majority.
There are so many interesting outstanding issues to discuss in the thread “The Emperor’s new clothes.” Personally, I would like to see this thread reopened for further discussion. God/religion is such an interesting topic for me [and perhaps for other people also]; billions of people in the world are affiliated to one religion or another.
Although some or many of the points we have offered or may offer in future may sound like old hat, there may be views others may not have heard of before. I for one would welcome anyone who has a fresh point to make or perhaps to offer a new insight or perspective that may change our own views or outlook on life, be it God-oriented, religion-oriented or otherwise. And we cannot discount that there is always a first-time for some people. In fact, come to think of it, most or all of us have gone through first-time experiences of one sort or another, e.g. eating out for the first time, watching a movie for the first time, etc.
I say, for every such characters that appear on MSM, can we do a special on them? Like this article allowing people to comment on people like him?
We must be fair to everyone, especially people like that one.
We must treat them the same fair logical treatment.
It will be good for everyone. Also, learning opportunity for many.
Agree with #65, all writers and contributors in MSM should prove their credibility by responding to readers’ rebuttals. Else, i feel that 1-way communication does not hold water. Naive people may take that as the truth , especially if alternative views and rebuttals are not published and given the same fair treatment.
In addition, All MSM reporters, writers and editors should at least respond to some comments by readers.
1-way communication is not the way to go ‘in the digital age’.
News can be more credible if it can tahan the scrutinization by the public.
May I say that anyone can express whatever views, opinions and ideas online. As in this Case, after Lionel De Souza wrote to the Forum, we got a very good reply from MDA to LDS in my opinion. Had LDS not written to the Press, we would not have know MDA’s Stand with regards online moderation.
It is common knowledge that whoever expound anything online will naturally and automatically be subjected to scrutiny by other online participants, which itself is a form of moderation as well as education(enlightening).
LDS has not appear on TOC lately and I hope that he does not feel unwelcome after the Incident. The Cyberspace is for all of us to use and of course we do hope that participants will not be too emotional, personal, political and vindictive.
The Net will not be interesting if there are only a handful of participants, it is only worth reading and participating when there are diversities in responses, views and ideas.
patriot
As long as everyone comes out of their apathetic shell and express their views, the net itself can self-regulate with minimal moderation. People whose views that cannot standup to scrutiny will be very quickly if not immediately debunked by the net community. The success of this depends on the number of readers – the more the better quality and self-regulation. Its like market forces will take care of itself.
people who write on the MSM must learn to be responsive to their critics especially the logical ones. Don’t run away after your article is published. We should engage debates with ALL MSM writers as well. I am sure they are up to the challenge.
Best comment is 12) by Ganga..
If any ‘run away’, it means that they have nothing better to say anymore, in a sense they admit defeat. Simple as that. The same happens with Straits Times writers, no response to comments to their stories mean they accept readers critics.
I agree that we should not discourage anyone from posting, especially on this, TOC website.
LDS would have managed in a less controversial manner if he had posted, using his real name or a pseudo name, and constructively challenged each viewpoint he disagreed with, with coherent arguments, instead of writing directly to TOC and flatly claiming that so many of the posts were not worth his efforts in reading them and that 8 posts were infringements [of the law?] and had the potential of raising friction between the various religious groups in Singapore. That, in my opinion, was high-handed and narrow-minded.
The ball now is on his side of the court so to speak. It’s for LDS to hit it back.
LDS, do a post here, with your real name?
last time, i get to read LDS’s articles on MSM and thought his must be something worth reading since ‘endorsed’ by the MSM in terms of allowing it to be published, so i guess must be some calibre.
now, seeing so many questions posed to him by readers, i am totally utterly completely disappointed in this LDS.
i agree that anyone’s article published in the msm papers must be able to defend what they say. non-reply is a not in favor of the authors. they must understand this as it involved their credibility. next time, anyone here think i would read his article? or save some time?
Thank you…
Further to my treatise on balls-carrying, i must say that, this phrase balls-carrying or carrying balls is a uniquely Singaporean concoction, a popularly used Singapore slang word which most people are familiar with here. You won’t find it on wikipedia or free online dictionary or in the oxford or cambridge dictionary either. Its a direct transliteration from the malay “angkat-bodek” or “bodek” for short. This piece of information is for the benefit of younger netizens who might not be familiar with local lingo and after all these younger netizens are the ones who are going to be on the frontline in our war with the PAPIES, and without a doubt they will be meeting up with a lot of angkat-bodek characters every now and then.And also, if characters like Lionel de Souza pop-up every now and then, i say good because they certainly provide comic relieve for everyone because as you know debates on TOC tend to get very serious sometimes.
LDS, look 75 comments staring at you. hahahahahaha!
ole dear ole dear
ex-inspector lioneldesouza is bein SNUB…………..
shame shame
go away
so malued
that lionel de souza must donned a wig just to drink beer in serangoon road…
Everywhere I read, it seems like only losers are on Gahmen (aka PAP) side. Its only those who are really lousy or no backbone that lean on the Godfather (aka PAPa).
rwkc (#64),
1) For a discussion to remain sane, it must be free of populism and other hidden agendas. On the “Emperor’s New Clothes”, I hardly had a chance to fully elaborate my views, because Smallvice was over-intent on painting me as a Fundamentalist. That is why I asked to have it closed.
2) Perhaps, we can raise the issue on the next thread of similar theme. Or you can always come to gmail to discuss the topic with me. [arixion@gmail.com]
3) I agree with you. Being constrained by dogma on either side is a hindrance to proper debate.
I am uncomfortable with apologetics who only want to participate in rigged debates where they can always win; hypocrites who accuse their opponents of rigging debates but think that they are perfectly entitled to do so because God is on their side. It is true; the proper purpose of debates/dialectics is to reach the Truth; but clearly that cannot be done if either side already believes that it has obtained the precise and complete truth.
Concurrently, I am also uncomfortable with the New Atheists (e.g. Dawkins, Hitchens) who are only willing to see everything through the narrow prism of science. They are debaters who refused to contemplate new approaches and broaden their mental horizons. I was watching a documentary on History Channel (StarHub Ch 09) yesterday, where I was surprised to learn that the first person to propose the foundational idea for the Big Bang, the Super-Atom Theory, was not just a physicist, but an Anglican Priest as well! So, who says religion and science can’t go together?
#79 Arix
Re the Big Bang, yes, it was a Belgian priest by the name of Georges Lemaitre who in 1927 proposed the BBT.
Discussions on such a metaphysical subject as God/god should be open for review/input by others, and thus I think TOC is an ideal forum. If you have it on a one to one basis, via email, either party can go on endlessly without knowing that what was said makes no sense.
In the scenario here you happen to be the only person arguing on the theistic position. There are, if I am not incorrect, at least six of us here facing you. And that’s why I suggested that only one or two issues should be raised at a time, by any one of us. Furthermore, a single issue may result in spin-offs to other areas.
I am not sure whether it is correct to use the term “New Atheists” to label Dawkins and Hitchens. They happen to be among a crop of atheists who can argue cogently for their position.
It is for others, theists and non-theists alike, to judge whether it is reasonable to argue for or against a proposition, and the arguments being offered in this respect. If a person cannot reason or understand simple logic, then it would be pointless to discuss with that person.
Hi Arix #79,
There is no hidden agenda. I have openly said I will oppose anyone who wants to install the voice of religion in the political sphere, not just electoral politics. If religion wants to have a voice in politics, then it would be asking for a witch hunt. I don’t like witch hunts, so I implore people not to pursue this line of thought.
rwkc (#80),
1) yep.
2) As Smallvice would be only too willing to point out, the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act might be enforced if we become too religious here. After all, this is the thread which discusses LDS’s complaint to MDA. Somehow, I doubt that LDS would find arguments by either Smallvice or Sliim to be very much non-inflammatory, and him complaining to MDA isn’t good for TOC, because it at least puts TOC on MDA’s watch-list.
I don’t wish to be part of a discussion that ends up putting TOC in jail. I wonder if MDA still has that “political website” classification.
Perhaps a better forum would be Terence’s blog at http://irreligious.blogspot.com. At least his blog is fully declared to be on religious matters.
3) As I said before, I didn’t coin the term. The term was coined by other Agnostics and Atheists who believed that Dawkins and Hitchens are too “religious” (yep, exact word). Coming from the Atheist camp, “religious” isn’t a very flattering word; I think that much we can both agree.
4) And there have been many responses to Dawkins and Hitchens from all sides of the debate; a few examples:
The Dawkins Delusion (Alister McGrath, Theist)
(I can’t remember the title)(Francis T. Collins, head of the Human Genome Project, Theist & bioscientist)
Why I don’t Believe in Atheists (Chris Hedges, Agnostic)
God Without God (Michael Hampson, Agnostic)
The Atheist Manifesto (Michel Onfrey, Atheist)
#82 Arix
First, we need to understand that smallvice585 has made clear, on more than one occasion, that he has no hidden agenda [#81 being his latest on this issue].
LDS has expressed his views but that does not mean he must be right. You seem to be having the notion, in your own words, “the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act might be enforced if we become too religious here. After all, this is the thread which discusses LDS’s complaint to MDA. Somehow, I doubt that LDS would find arguments by either Smallvice or Sliim to be very much non-inflammatory, and him complaining to MDA isn’t good for TOC, because it at least puts TOC on MDA’s watch-list.”
I think it was you who first raised the God/religious issue and then as a natural consequence further discussions developed. Remember, Peter Sellers specifically asked TOC to allow the discussions to continue?
I cannot recall anything inflammatory being said by anybody, and I cannot accept your viewpoint that “LDS would find arguments by either Smallvice or Sliim to be very much non-inflammatory.” That is every bit as subjective as saying: “I don’t agree with your view or palate that chocolate ice cream tastes better than vanilla ice cream.” “So what?” – would be the rational and natural response.
If I say suicide bombers are evil people or some Christians were at one time fanatical bigots [bigotry still exists, by the way], would that be construed as inflammatory? Let’s not mince words – we should call a spade a spade. Religious bigotry of course is not expected to entertain alternative or opposing viewpoints. Inciting violence is the style of demagogues; discussing a subject matter in a civil manner will lead to clarification or enlightenment.
If you have read widely, you would know that religious debates have been conducted in prestigious institutions, such as universities, in the last several decades. And transcriptions have been made available for some of these debates, for the benefit of the public. Debates of this nature have also been conducted in Internet websites and many websites can be found to be ongoing forums for such discussions.
Articles about religious beliefs have been published in The Straits Times, notwithstanding the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act. I don’t see how our discussions can be the subject of infringement of this enactment.
rwkc (#83),
1) That is so rich of him. well, obviously he doesn’t have any hidden agenda after his agenda has been revealed.
2) As Smallvice would say, it doesn’t matter whether he is right; what matters is whether MDA thinks LDS is right.
3) Actually, Smallvice was the first to raise the issue. And yes, I remember PS’s request. The point though is not so much who started the debate/discussion, but who first turned a “civilized” discussion into a flame war. As far as I note, Smallvice and Sliim came within a hairlength of flaming me for being a theist.
And I am far more progressive compared to LDS (who laments frequently about how much the Church has changed from the Middle Ages). So I logically extrapolate.
4) So what, you ask. Well, so it leads to LDS perception that Christianity and Religion are being insulted on the thread.
5) It would be inflammatory if you didn’t specify how they are bigots. What else would be inflammatory in a debate on religion is if you flat-out told a Religious person to abandon his or her religion. Arguing that the religion is false or inaccurate or whatever is fine, but telling people to leave a religion crosses the line.
6) Yes, I know that. I am not as ignorant as many of you seem to think I am.
7) The Straits Times mostly publishes statistical articles, not discussive ones. The closest to a discussive article it published with regards to the AWARE Saga was Prof Thio’s (Sr) Op-Ed, and even that was generic, and nothing like our discussion on the Bible.
Arix, on 2 Jul I did a response to your #84 but I am unsure whether it is open for review by others. I can see from my PC that it appears on the screen as #85 with the qualification “Your comment is awaiting moderation”.
I am now reposting my message.
[#84 Arix]
1] I shall leave this to smallvice585.
2] What if MDA thinks LDS is right and we all think that MDA is wrong in giving in to LDS’ views? As you have presumably read the vociferous criticism made by many of us here regarding the huge financial losses incurred by Temasek, notwithstanding the defense, abject from our viewpoint, being offered by several govt ministers on behalf of Temasek, would you say we have no grounds to criticize as we did? Would you accept that If the govt insists that Temasek did no wrong, then the govt and Temasek must be right and we are wrong?
3] I disagree; the discussions we were having were conducted with civility. There was no question of the discussion turning into a “flame war”. It appears to be a matter of personal perception – yours.
4] It was LDS’ prerogative to think along those lines, but LDS by now and assuming that he has since read the responses to his complaint, would have realized that many people have expressed disagreement with his views. So what if he still insists that he is right? Thinking oneself is right does not by itself make it right, right?
5] The bigotry of the Christian religion in the past is well known; I suggest that you surf the Internet to ascertain pointers about “Christian bigotry.” Who is telling who to abandon his/her religion? If people want to discuss religion or religious issues/beliefs, they have to be receptive that their ideas may not have any influence on others. Immature people should not of course engage in intellectual discussions, let alone discuss sensitive issues like religious beliefs/practices. Who is “stupid enough” to do exactly what he/she is being “told”? I am sure that you are not that stupid or immature to carry out such an action. Maybe, you are right if you insist there are stupid people around us.
6] Yes, you seem to be a person with potential. But the point to remember is: what others think of you carries more weight than what you think you of yourself.
7] You were probably unborn or a toddler when The Straits Times carried an article that projected religion as a curse on humanity.
Wow……LDS and TPL now have so many netizens to sue.