Election watch: politics & the Singapore bloggers

From JGNews who also maintains his own blog.

Expect Singapore bloggers to be the target of new legislation or rules that will govern electronic communication during the next general election, which must be held no later than July 2007. Online political expressions have consistently surged in Singapore during periods leading up to national elections. These expressions are often discussions and debates centered around the rules and processes of the elections. But their special emphasis has always consisted of alternative reportage of election rallies and other elections-related news.

Monday, 07 November 2005


by James Gomez

Expect Singapore bloggers to be the target of new legislation or rules that will govern electronic communication during the next general election, which must be held no later than July 2007. Online political expressions have consistently surged in Singapore during periods leading up to national elections. These expressions are often discussions and debates centered around the rules and processes of the elections. But their special emphasis has always consisted of alternative reportage of election rallies and other elections-related news.

Presidential elections do not cause a stir on online forums. The first election for the Elected Presidency was in 1993. The mainstream media supported the PAP government’s favoured candidate Ong Teng Cheong, and at the time there were no personal websites or such things as blogs promoting either Ong or his rival, a former civil servant. Online discussions in forums in 1993 such as soc.culture.singapore did carry discussion on the criteria of selection for presidential candidates. Similar discussions in other online forums continued in subsequent presidential elections in 1999 and 2005, but these were again mostly confined to the procedural issue of selecting candidates and candidates’ qualification criteria. But online postings in discussion forums about the presidential elections have been low compared to general elections because of the absence of real contests.

Although the ruling party places legal and structural obstacles in front of opposition parties, it has been unable to totally prevent opposition parties from contesting the general elections. This, plus the general view that opposition parties do not get fair coverage in the local media, especially during elections times, has made the online domain an important avenue where alternative election “reporting” or postings take place. Either individually or in an organized manner, forums and overseas-based websites have been platforms used to make available alternative reports on general elections in Singapore. Blogs hold the potential to widen the coverage for individual reporting on future elections.

General elections and online alternative reporting

Even before the internet was widely available in Singapore in 1995, the Bulletin Board Service (BBS) at the National University of Singapore was used to discuss politics during the 1991 election and the 1992 by-election. The BBS was run by Technet that allowed staff and students to post text-based content on an electronic notice board, some of which were alternative reports of the elections. All these postings however could only be viewed internally and were not accessible to the general public, although staff and students from the Nanyang Technological University could also access it.

It was after the internet was widely made available in 1995 and the establishment of various online forums and websites that alternative reporting of election rallies and other election related news began to appear. This was most notable in 1997 and in a reduced form in the 2001 general election. But what was typical was that during the run up to each election, the PAP government introduced new legislation to control online political expression. In July 1996, a regulation called the Class Licence Scheme was introduced that required websites dealing with political and religious issues register with the authorities. It also made website owners responsible for all the contents on their sites.

Nevertheless, during the 1997 election, Sintercom, founded by an early user of soc.culture.singapore, Tan Chong Kee, became a front runner in election reporting online. Also, Sintercom was exempted from registering under the Class Licence Scheme after negotiations with the authorities, who were assured that Sintercom’s editors and site owners would “exercise responsibility, intelligence and maturity” when managing the website. Sintercom organized teams of volunteers to attend various election rallies and write reports on them. The website also put up past election results, constituency maps and extracts from the various party manifestoes. Some postings on soc.culture.singapore by individual posters were also compiled and carried on the Sintercom site. Tan claimed that overall, Sintercom’s reportage was timelier and fairer in coverage than the mainstream Singapore newspapers.

Ahead of the November 2001 general election, the Parliamentary Elections Act was amended in October to allow and set conditions for political parties to campaign or carry out “election advertising” on the internet. However the rules forbid the websites of non-political party groups or non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to do the same, thus restricting the space for online election activities to only political parties. It was only a few months earlier, in July 2001, that Sintercom was compelled to register under the Class Licence Scheme with no room for debate. Tan refused to register the site and shut it down instead, leading to the loss of a major source of online alternative reporting, as Tan had made plans to continue the tradition of election reporting that Sintercom had done for the previous general elections. The new laws prevented local NGOs from taking up the job of election reporting or advertising. Think Centre had to remove some articles from its site during the run-up to the election after the Elections Department demanded that it remove material that could be construed as elections advertising, in one instance specifying a particular article.

But overseas-based websites could escape Singapore government censure. Those such as the Singaporeans For Democracy (SFD) site carried news reports and articles about the 2001 elections in a section labeled “elections 2001”. These were mainly from international news agencies, news magazines and newspapers, as well as opposition leaders and academics. It also featured letters from the public about election issues, and also contained a number of links to elections-related websites. However the SFD site has stopped uploads since 2003.

The 2001 legislation made alternative reporting on the election suffer a setback. While the mainstream media was still deemed to be too biased in their election coverage, the volume of reporting on election rallies dropped, mainly because of the closure of Sintercom. However, the mantle of non-mainstream, alternative election reporting fell onto certain individuals who continued to report on election events. These were posted largely anonymously on forums like sgForums.com and Sammyboy’s Alfresco Coffee Shop, and were not journalistic reports but personal accounts of observations and experiences at opposition rallies. Sometimes these postings were contested. However, the number of postings about the elections was small and not coordinated.

Blogs and political expression

Starting in 2004, Singapore has witnessed an explosion of blogs. It has been estimated that there are between 2,500 and 15,000 blogs based in Singapore. Only a handful of these are overtly devoted to politics. Most blogs are personal diaries and journals, others ranging from social commentary to humour and satire, with some political issues thrown in. Some blogs provide more specific socio-political commentary. Although the number of political blogs have been increasing, most of these are “nameless” entities whose authors do not provide their real names or email addresses.

Chee Soon Juan is probably the first opposition politician to have a personal home page. It came as a “Chee Soon Juan” link on the Singaporean For Democracy website which is hosted overseas. Between 1997 and 2001, it carried alternative news reports on the activities of Chee as well as some of his speeches delivered at various conferences. Much of such information has been incorpaorated in the SDP website after it was launched in the run-up to the 2001 general elections.

Individual press releases issued by JB Jeyaretnam, former secretary-general of the Workers’ Party began to appear online after he left the party in 2001. In the beginning he would fax his press releases to Think Centre, and the NGO representatives would type this up and upload it on their website. Such releases would also be sent through the Think Centre mailing list. In 2004, a JBJ supporters’ website was set up by volunteers. His press releases would be faxed to the volunteers who would then type it and upload it. In 2005, in order to take advantage of the blog technology, a blog was set up specifically to upload his press releases. Again the role of a volunteer to upload data is still essential.

The 2005 presidential election saw some political traffic online. Seen as a potentially eligible candidate, Andrew Kuan set up a personal website promoting himself as a candidate. His website contained information about his background, qualifications, curriculum vitae, various other details about his life and beliefs, all for the purpose of advocating his candidacy for the office of the elected president of Singapore. In addition, after he was deemed unqualified to run for president by the relevant government committee, an online petition supporting him as a presidential candidate was also started.

With arrival of blogs, a small number of opposition figures have started blogging, namely Goh Meng Seng, Melvin Tan and James Gomez, all from the Workers’ Party of Singapore. Goh is a member of its executive council and in his blog, entitled Singapore Alternatives, identifies himself as a member of the party and states that he will write on various policy views and personal beliefs. Melvin Tan’s blog is entitled Singapore Loyalist but does not list is real name, and states that his writings are done on his personal capacity and do are represent the official positions of the Workers’ Party. He also takes part in forums under the handle “SgLoyalist”. James Gomez is an assistant secretary-general of the party and has a personal website as well as a blog. His personal website became active in early 2004, and showcases his publications, conference trips, meetings, and his professional work. In October 2005 he created a blog dealing specifically with his work with the Workers’ Party.

Blogs and other personal websites dedicated to politics have emerged because there are persons engaged in politics who are able to generate a sizable amount of information. This means there is a latent pressure on politicians who are able to generate large amounts of information to move towards individual websites or blogs. Whether they do so or not depends on personal inclinations, the political value of doing so, and the capacity to engage with new technology. The number of politicians with individual online presence is also an indication of the digital divide both in terms of technology and mindset within the opposition movement in Singapore.

Conclusion: Blogging and freedom of expression

Blogs represent the newest medium for expressing independent though and reaching out to the larger world. It is also becoming the area where threats to freedom of expression have been increasing. The Singapore authorities and other establishment figures have taken action against individual bloggers or internet users whom they deemed to have disparaged against them or broken some laws.

The first official case against a blogger was in late 2005 when Chen Jiahao, a student and former government scholar based in the United States, had allegedly written posts in his blog criticizing some of the policies of the Agency for Science, Technology and Research. The head of the agency, Philip Yeo, then threatened Chen with legal action if he did not remove all of the offending material. Chen apologized to Yeo and shut down his entire blog in order to be completely safe from prosecution.

The next prominent cases that came a few months later involved three internet users who were charged under the Sedition Act. The first incident saw two ethnic Chinese bloggers in their 20s charged with sedition for making inflammatory postings on the internet against Muslims. The second incident involved a third ethnic Chinese male in his teens who was similarly charged for making inflammatory posts in his blog.

Although not related to legal actions, other developments are changing the blogging landscape in Singapore. Several secondary schools and junior colleges have asked student bloggers who criticized or insulted their teachers online to remove the offending remarks or posts, with some of the students being suspended for a few days.

From the 1990s to 2001, only organisations, real or virtual, came under the purview of the law. These cases, however, have since set a precedent for prosecuting individual bloggers or other internet users. Hence, raising the profile of bloggers especially those who provide alternative sources of news and commentary in restricted societies is important. In particular, to highlight threats and actual attacks against freedom of expression on the internet.

The upcoming general elections are seeing another surge in online political expression. Given developments in technology, blogs have come to occupy an important part of Singapore’s online landscape. But it remains to be seen if bloggers would be willing to venture further with online political expression, thereby risking a clampdown by the authorities; or whether they would be pressured by existing laws to impose constraints on themselves. One way or another, during the run-up to the next election, Singapore bloggers are likely to be the target of close observation.

Blogs can and are increasingly fulfilling the role of watchdogs, alternative news sources and even non-partisan political players because they are crossing beyond the boundary of their original uses as vehicles of personal expression. They have extended their reach to promote and debate topics as diverse as governance, integrity and fair dealing, and in doing so may effect positive changes. In countries with restrictive environments, it is important that bloggers be properly protected by law from arbitrary or unfair prosecution. Only by doing so can blogs be another frontier of freedom of expression.