By Robin Hicks
This commentary appeared in Mumbrella, an onlineĀ magazine in Hong KongĀ
The other day, I had the displeasure of reading aĀ blog post that should cause offence to anyone with half a brain.
Now, Iām all for freedom of speech, and one of theĀ reasons Iām based in Hong Kong and not in Singapore is because the press here isĀ relatively free.
But how this post, which was published onĀ theĀ news site The Real Singapore, is allowed to exist in the public domainĀ in a country with fiercely strictĀ laws is a mystery to me.
The post, which goes by the extraordinary headline STOP HUMANIZING THEĀ BANGLAS/ INDIAN FTs!, begins with the words:
Ok so at a very technical/ genetic level, they are humans. But I am notĀ talking technically here. My point is they are not the āsame kindā of humans weĀ are. They have different cultural and moral bearings and these differences needĀ to be acknowledged so that we can decide how to deal with this group ofĀ people.
The post makes for ugly reading. So to save you the trouble, it goes on toĀ argue ā in bewilderingly ignorant fashion ā how Indians and Bangladeshis haveĀ limited thinking ability, donāt value human life, are corrupt and mistreatĀ women.
If there is an article that is likely to incite racial hatred, at a timeĀ when racial tensions between locals and foreigners in Singapore are hardly rosy,Ā just three days after the most violent riots in 40 years, it is this one.
Does this post not breach Singaporeās Sedition Act?
I quote from Wikipedia:
Subsection 3 of the Act describes the types of publication that haveĀ seditious tendency and these include publication that āpromote feelings ofĀ ill-will and hostility between different races or classesā.
Singapore takes social cohesion and racial harmony in the country seriouslyĀ because of its multi-cultural makeup.
About 40 per cent of the population are foreigners, the sixth-highestĀ percentage in the world. In 2009, 74.2% of residents were of Chinese, 13.4% ofĀ Malay, and 9.2% of Indian descent, while Eurasians and other groups formĀ 3.2%.
Also contributing to the nationās sensitivity on racial harmony is itsĀ history of racial riots in the 1960s. More recent events of racial violence inĀ neighbouring Indonesia in the late 1990s and early 2000s also serve as remindersĀ of potential inter-racial conflicts in the region.
Thankfully, in the comment thread beneath the piece, many posters give theĀ author ā who by the way does not give his/her real name ā short thrift.
But many do not.
The issue here is that Singaporeās media regulator, the Media DevelopmentĀ Authority, has recently introduced a tough new licensing regime for online newsĀ reporting, but no one is really clear what these rules are for, nor what theyĀ mean.
I would humbly suggest, MDA, that if you have laws against such reporting,Ā you actually do something about it.
Is this article not trampling all over Singaporeās famous OB markers ā andĀ at the worse time, possibly in the countryās short history?
The disclaimer at the beginning of the post is a cowardly cop-out.
It reads:
TheRealSingapore.com is a platform for users to submit content and allĀ content remains the property of the individual contributors. The views andĀ opinions expressed by author(s) within the website are solely that of theĀ contributors and in no way reflects the views of TheRealSingapore.com
It may well have been the property of the contributor when he or she wroteĀ it. But it is yours now. Because you have published it on your website.
A follow-up post by the same author which has since been added to theĀ original is equally vile and misguided.
This week the licensing regime claimed its latest victim – the BreakfastĀ Network ā which closed on Tuesday because it refused to sign MDA’s forms.
The Independent, which launched in August, was also leant on by theĀ regulator — even before its launch. The MDA claimed that it is worried theĀ foreigners are interested in funding the website. In its shareholders agreementĀ signed in April,Ā The Independent has made it explicitly clearĀ that itĀ won’t take foreign money. TheĀ site has goneĀ ahead to signĀ theĀ forms.
MDA, perhaps, in this case, you should be leaning on The Real SingaporeĀ too?