Thursday, April 1, 2010

Implications of the Singapore Media Model on Us!

FijiVillage (Media will be familiar with decree: AG Publish date/time: 01/04/2010 [17:05]) reported that the ILLEGAL AG said the proposed decree will focus on the Code Of Ethics which was introduced by the Fiji Media Council.

He said with the contents included in the decree, it will be easier to enforce issues in relation to the different aspects of the media.
He also  said the government has also considered the Media Development Authority model used in Singapore and the US laws have been considered in relation to media ownership.

The bottom line is: THE MILITARY REGIME AND ITS ILLEGAL MINISTER OF INFORMATION WANTS TO SILENCE ANY VOICE OF OPPOSITION TO THEIR ILLEGAL RULE. IT IS TIME THE MEDIA PEOPLE TAKE A STAND, ALONG WITH THE CHURCH AND THE PEOPLE OF FIJI TO DEMAND THAT THEIR DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS AND FREEDOM BE RESTORED. IF NOT, WE WILL END UP LIKE THE SUBMISSIVE AND OPPRESSED PEOPLE OF SO-CALLED "DEMOCRATIC" SINGAPORE!

As Alex Au of Singapore argues "the true intention [of the media model] is to buttress the continued political dominance of the People's Action Party, and to do so partly by promoting the Government's social engineering efforts."

We are REAL PEOPLE NOT some machines to be socially engineered!


That is interesting indeed because according to some research on the media model used in Singapore, these are some of the interesting findings as recorded in Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_of_Singapore).

Regulation

The Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts is the government's regulatory body that imposes and enforces regulation over locally-produced media content. It also decides on the availability of published media from abroad.
In its Annual Worldwide Press Freedom Index for 2004, Reporters Without Borders ranked Singapore 147 out of 167. Most of the local media are directly or indirectly controlled by the government through shareholdings of these media entities by the state's investment arm Temasek Holdings, and are often perceived as pro-government[3]. William Gibson's Disneyland with the Death Penalty described Singapore's newspapers as "essentially organs of the state"[4], while political scientist and opposition politician James Gomez has studied the role of self-censorship in restricting expression in Singapore.


Newspaper

The Newspaper and Printing Presses Act of 1974 states:
No person shall print or publish or assist in the printing or publishing of any newspaper in Singapore unless the chief editor or the proprietor of the newspaper has previously obtained a permit granted by the Minister authorising the publication thereof, which permit the Minister may in his discretion grant, refuse or revoke, or grant subject to conditions to be endorsed thereon.
—Newspaper and Printing Presses Act of 1974, Cap. 206, Sec. 21. —(1)

Furthermore, restrictions on importing foreign newspapers to Singapore exist, most especially for politically-sensitive publications. For instance, Malaysia's New Straits Times newspaper can't be imported into Singapore (likewise, Singapore's Straits Times can't be exported to Malaysia).

Censorship

The Government of Singapore argues that censorship of violence and sexual themes is necessary as the Singaporean populace is deeply conservative, and censorship of political, racial and religious content is necessary to avoid upsetting the balance of Singapore's delicate multi-racial society. K Bhavani, spokesperson of the Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts, has stated:
In relaxing our censorship policies, the Government needs to take into account the concerns and values of the majority of Singaporeans. Our people are still largely conservative. Hence, the Government needs to balance between providing greater space for free expression and the values upheld by the majority.[3]
Commentators such as Alex Au, on the other hand, argue that the true intention is to buttress the continued political dominance of the People's Action Party, and to do so partly by promoting the Government's social engineering efforts.[4]

No comments: