S’pore licenses news sites

In a historic move, 10 top websites have to register if they want to continue to report on the republic’s news and current affairs.

(The Star) – IT is happening! In a historic move, the Singapore government is moving into the Internet to regulate news reporting by requiring – for a start – the 10 biggest news-sites to be licensed.

From today, these websites must renew their registration every year if they want to continue to report on Singapore news and current affairs.

Some observers believe that the principal target is the rising number of Singaporeans who post comments attached to, rather than, the news reports themselves.

These public reactions and discussions are overwhelmingly anti-government.

Many Internet users have accused the government of trying to dampen free discussions.

A performance bond of S$50,000 (RM122,206), similar to that required for TV broadcasters, is required.

Offenders will be ordered to remove portions assessed to be “in breach of content standards” such as undermining racial or religious harmony, within 24 hours.

There was no mention of political boundaries, but given the tradition here, dissent is likely to be a top target.

A survey by The Straits Times had found 36.3% of people between the ages of 21 and 34 cited the Internet as their top source of domestic political news, compared with 35.3% who preferred newspapers.

Failure to do so could be severe.

The owner may be fined a whooping S$200,000 (RM488,824) or imprisoned up to three years or both.

Legislation will probably dilute the intensity of online discussions since all are commercial enterprises.

If it works, it may create history, not only here but possibly elsewhere too.

The Singapore experiment will undoubtedly be watched with interest by

Governments outside Singapore, particularly China, to see if they can also adopt a similar method of controlling web dissent.

A bigger issue will be if – and when – the measure to regulate is extended to cover blogs that are operated by small groups or individuals. A few are highly popular with Singaporean Internet users.

Presently, they are excluded said a spokesman nut he added: “If they take on the nature of news sites, we will take a closer look and evaluate them accordingly”.

Some bloggers are already discussing possible options to take in case the authorities move against them. One was quoted by a news agency as saying: “You can try to shut us up. We will find a way around it.”

The chosen 10 are obviously easier targets, vulnerable because they are large commercial enterprises.

But blogs, which exist like little cells, are another matter. Many are anonymously edited; some may operate from outside Singapore.

Some bloggers say if the crunch comes, they rely more on FaceBook and Twitter.

People who have their own pages – including Prime Minister Lee and several cabinet ministers – are already writing and posting without control.

Another possible means could be mass e-mails, in which a writer can send articles to a designated list of thousands of people simultaneous with a press of a button.

Of the chosen 10 websites, nine belong to the two giant media companies, Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) and Mediacorp.

Since both are staunchly pro-government, they are unlikely to be the principal targets since any reporting excesses can easily be rectified by a phone call without resorting to laws.

The tenth, Yahoo Inc Singapore, however, is a different kettle. In the past few years, this US-based web browser has gained rising popularity among Singaporeans for its objective news coverage.

It has reserved comment pending receipt of details of the new regulations.

The sweep may be extended to include foreign websites that regularly report on the city, like The Financial Times, CNN and BBC.

This means that they, too, like Yahoo Inc will have to obtain a license or stop reporting on Singapore.

According to AFP, Yahoo has a team of reporters whose coverage of Singapore’s major news has become “a magnet for anti-government comments posted by readers in reaction to local news.

Actually, this is a similar problem for many operators, including the pro-government media. Quite often, it is not their reporting, which is pro-government, but the critical comments it attracts from angry readers.

It is understood that the new measures will attribute any “excessive” or “extremist” reader comments to the web operators.

Early this year, PM Lee had given a strong hint that such legislation was forthcoming when he warned that sensitive, extremist views were being raised over the web.

“We don’t believe the community in the social space, especially online, moderates itself. It doesn’t happen anywhere in the world.”

“It’s in the nature of the medium, the way the interactions work and that’s the reason why we think it cannot be completely left by itself,” he added.

Apparently, Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam has a slightly different view.

Some bloggers were quite thoughtful, said Tharman, who is also Finance Minister, though more balance is needed.

“Well, it cannot be ignored and I think so far, on balance, the fact that you’ve got an active social media is a plus. It’ll go through phases,” his deputy PM told The Straits Times.

Politically for the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP), moving to stamp out web dissent is a tempting proposition with the general election due in 2016.

The party has been losing popularity among its core supporters who had kept it in power for nearly half a century.

But for PM Lee Hsien Loong, there are political risks. He had obviously acted out of conviction that it is necessary.

A journalism student remarked: “Now people are saying half-jokingly that father started to control the print media, now son wants to do the same the with Internet news media.”