Some time ago, I decided to stop writing on my blog to spend more time on my real life issues but some readers have asked me to continue writing my blog to keep up with my 'online battle' against xenophobic alternative media websites/ Facebook pages. So I am back to 'deal' with some 'online rascals' since the Online/Offline Facebook Page seems to be more of a 'Pussy', I mean 'little kitten'..... d(^_^)b
I may not be your neighborhood 'Marvel Heroes' who possesses mutant powers or spin webs like spiderman but 'Little Fish' can turn into a 'piranha' & bite. (of course, I am just kidding!)
What I am going to show below is the recent articles I read about 'Internet Censorship' from Yahoo and a 'fabricated' article that is aimed to stir xenophobia against PRC which was alerted to me by Ms. Lara Tan (reader) & 'Fabrications About the PAP' (FB page).
It certainly does give some food for thoughts about the much talked 'Internet Censorship' and the online 'Code of Conduct'. I have previously blogged about the COC. Click here
To start off, you may like to read Yahoo's article first, click >> "Most Singaporeans Against Internet Censorship"
Next, see the photo below.
Originally From Singapore Hall Of Shame: http://
TheRealSingapore blog has been exposed of fabricating "story in an attempt to stir up racist hatred against foreigners."
See the next photo below: (Note the arrows in 'RED')
"TRS had posted photo of China flags and claimed that it hung across an open padang area at the Marina Bay Gardens By the Bay. TRS further claimed that hundreds of PRC nationals sung the China national anthem.
This story is untrue as in actuality the dated photo was taken from a China website www.rayallychina.com and it was dated 4 Oct 2009!" Click here for faster access to original photo.
Little Fish Note: "Opposition politician Alex Tan Zhixiang is a contributor at TRS but it is unknown if he has greater role in the newly established alternative news media." - from Sharon.S
See the photo below on Alex Tan and click on the links to read more about his info
A person of the same name "Alex Tan Zhi Xiang" is also allegedly the admin for the blog, TemasekRevealed, well known for fabricating news. It was closed down after police investigate the posting on "SAF serviceman's death" hoax. Related: Click Here
EDMW Love Singapore page make the same allegation recently. Related: Click here
Below comments extracted from Fabrications About the PAP:
1. "Under Singapore law, the transmission of false messages is an offence under Section 45 of the Telecommunications Act.
If the act is done with intent to create cause fear and alarm, or to incite offences against a class or community of persons, it may also be an offence under Section 505 of the Penal Code. Offenders may be punished with imprisonment for up to 3 years, fined or both." ~ Ryan Ang
2. "This is why the anti foreigner a sentiments are getting from bad to worst. This kind of pple are not making lives any better for Singapore and Singaporeans. This could be deem as intentional attempt to incite unrest among the population. Freedom of speech doesn't not imply u can speak or fabricate what u want without actual proof. Play your part to be a responsible netizen else be punish and accept responsibility for your own bad behavior." ~ Yong Quan
Now for HUMOR TIME!
Latest: SG known Blogger, Alex Au is on headlines again.
This isn't the first time he got into trouble. Back in 14 February 2012, he received a letter from law firm Allen & Gledhill, acting for K Shanmugam. It said that the allegations regarding their client mentioned within a comment he posted following the post The media and Yaw Shin Leong, are false and scurrilous. To refresh your memory, please click here to view.
11 July 2012, Wednesday
'I apologise for committing that act of contempt of court, and have taken down the offending post. I will not in future put up any post to the same or similar effect.' - Alex Au, Yawning Bread.
To view the latest entire article, please click here.
Temasek Review Emeritus's Editor, Mr Richard Wan also received a letter from both Mr. Lee Hsien Yang & PM Lee Hsien Loong on 20 February 2012. I have published 4 links below for your reference. Please click them below.
1) PM Lee sends lawyer's letter to editor of TR Emeritus (20 Feb 2012)
2) Letter of Apology to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong (21 Feb 2012)
3) Lee Hsien Yang sends lawyer's letter to TR Emeritus (23 Feb 2012)
4) TR Emeritus removes defamatory comment on Mr Lee Hsien Yang (23 Feb 2012)
*Links contributed by 'Fabrications About the PAP'.
Little Fish Note: So what does the above tells you? So what do you think? Democracy & Freedom of Speech does not mean IRRESPONSIBLE SPEECH! Singapore currently do not have 'Internet Censorship' nor 'Code of Conduct' online, yet some people are already publishing MISLEADING & MISINFORMATION to the public, not forgetting 'The Talking Rubbish' and its clones.
Readers, please be more alert when you subscribe to some spin-offs/ clones claiming 'Alternative Media News'. They are not helping Singaporeans to understand SG politics, just trying play on to your mind & to stir up your emotions to hate foreigners & direct your VOTES to inferior opposition party or opportunists in GE2016 who are not even qualified to be your constituency MPs. Now you know who these people are...
Yes, irresponsible people spouting nonsense and inciting fear is a problem. But I'd be really careful about condemning freedom of speech outright just because of that. I don't think the government should ever be involved in regulating speech, especially on the internet, and to be honest, the tactics used by our politicians thus far (lawsuits and the like) make them seem like bullies. Would it have been that hard to write a response and ask TR to publish it before threatening legal action?
ReplyDeletehi Xu Wang, Thank you for your comment.
ReplyDeleteMy opinion (my guess only):
It may seem like a 'bully' but when we look into the seriousness of the cases, they probably decide this is the best way to clear the air once and for all, no room for debates to invite further online nonsense, focusing on more important issues. Taking in factors like the author/ writer's profile, his/her influence in community, the serious impact it has on public opinions and immediate urgency to clear the air. For sites like TR, we all know they are anti-government online. Let's not miss out their 'compassionate side' where their law firms only issued 'letters' and they are not sued.
Cheers-LF
Yes, it is important to clear their reputation. And I certainly have no sympathy for people who write unfounded nonsense. But the way to clear your reputation is not through heavy handed means like lawsuits. When you do that, it really looks like you're desperately trying to hide something. If, however, you give a well written, rational response, you clear your reputation much more effectively.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I believe strongly in the importance of freedom of speech, and when those in power use their influence to shut down all criticism, that sets a very unpleasant precedent (though it could be said that the precedent has been set long ago by LKY's series of lawsuits against the opposition in the early days of Singapore)
While we all want freedom of speech, we must also take note not to cross the line. I should say there are thousands of criticism over the internet now, some of which are very extreme or false. We are not completely shut out of all criticism up to date. They have also proposed the COC or Internet Censorship but we have declined, they didn't impose at all. But have we seen what is their proposal on COC or Internet Censorship? No? So now it is entirely up to our intellect to tell right from wrong. As our people are better educated & rational nowadays, we should be safe from falsehoods circulating online. Have a good day Xu Wang, nice having a conversation with you mate.
ReplyDeleteWhen I say I support freedom of speech, what I mean is that I don't want speech to be controlled by some overarching authority. People should be free to say what they want. Now of course, just because you can say something, doesn't mean that you should. I could walk around shouting insults at random people, but I really shouldn't do that.
ReplyDeleteI hope that people can learn to be better at looking at things rationally, and applying an appropriate amount of skepticism to everything. I also believe that as rational members of society, we have a responsibility to call others out when they're spreading potentially harmful nonsense.
My views on freedom of speech do become a little less certain when it comes to hate speech. I really dislike the idea of an authority telling people what they can and cannot say, and I wish I could believe that people would stop saying these things, but unfortunately I know that is not the case. Given the amount of harm that divisive hate speech can cause, *maybe* some sort of intervention is justified. But I really hope that one day that will become unnecessary.
Oh and yes, its nice having a conversation with you too. So refreshing to be able to have a rational discussion in comments :)
Latest:
ReplyDeleteThe Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) today issued a statement defending the law of contempt in Singapore, in response to posts by socio-political blogger Alex Au. Mr Au last week posted a letter of apology on his blog over his June 18 post, "Woffles Wu case hits a nerve", which the AGC said scandalised the courts and misrepresented various facts in relation to the case. Mr Au also took down the post. On Sunday, Mr Au, posted a new blog entry about contempt of the court. He titled it "Using power to give immunity to the powerful".
Here is the statement, in full:
"The law of contempt exists to protect public confidence in the administration of justice. Accusations of bias diminish it in the eyes of the citizen, lower it and ultimately damage the nation. Such accusations can occur frequently, with the judges not being able to respond. That is why confidence in the administration of justice needs to be protected from such allegations.
The steps taken by AGC in respect of Alex Au's post of 18 June 2012 were with that objective. Unlike other blogs or commentary, Alex Au went beyond merely criticising the judgment. He deliberately misrepresented the facts, and then accused the court of being biased, on the basis of his false facts. This is very wrong. To make his points sound valid Alex Au decided to mislead.
Thus AGC asked Mr Au to remove his remarks setting out the false facts, and apologise for making the contemptuous remarks of the judiciary. It is misleading of Mr Au to now allege that our laws on contempt prevent debate and curtail free speech without acknowledging what he has done.
A judge can be criticised, even fiercely criticised for getting the law or facts wrong, for getting the decision wrong or for imposing the wrong sentence. This is regularly done by lawyers, academics and lay persons. Such criticism is not contempt. There is no curtailment of free speech that would prevent such criticism. It is contempt however to say that the court was biased if there is no objective rational basis to do so, as Alex Au did.
Where the parties to a case do feel that a judge has committed misconduct, avenues are available to raise the issue, and have it determined within our Court system. Depending on the level of the Court, and the stage of the proceedings, possible avenues include appeal, criminal revision or motions to reopen decided cases. Although the reopening of a case is very rarely done, there will be reopening if it is shown that an injustice has been caused. Judges guilty of misconduct will be dealt with through various disciplinary mechanisms depending on whether they are district judges or Justices of the Supreme Court.
We should note that Singapore is not alone in protecting the judiciary in this way. Other countries have similar laws on contempt.
We also note that Alex Au has made references to the announcements by Malaysia on its law on sedition. This is a non sequitor, of no relevance whatsoever to the subject at hand. Contempt has nothing to do with sedition."
Source: TODAYonline> http://www.todayonline.com/Hotnews/EDC120717-0000096/AGC-issues-statement-on-Law-of-Contempt