AIMS gets feedback to create virtual Speaker’s Corner
By S Ramesh, Channel NewsAsia Posted: 19 September 2008 2156 hrs
Related Videos
AIMS gets feedback to create virtual Speaker's Corner
SINGAPORE: The advisory council studying the impact of new media had received feedback to create a virtual Speaker's Corner and to repeal the section in the Films Act on party political films. There had been robust and strong criticism of some parts of the committee's report, said the chairman of Advisory Council on the Impact of New Media on Society (AIMS), Cheong Yip Seng. In particular, netizens said a watered-down section of the Films Act on party political films is not going to be effective. And the council saw their point. Mr Cheong said, "You cannot stop people from putting prohibited content on YouTube, you can't do that unless Singapore decides to shut down YouTube, which is not going to happen because the damage for Singapore will be a lot worse than just a repeal of the act." On their part, bloggers at the forum felt if something is to be banned, the powers should not rest with the minister. The issue should be debated by an independent body and decided upon. But when it came to issues of race and religion, even the netizens were not advocating a free for all. Netizens had also suggested that they should come up with a code of practice that can guide discussions online. Mr Cheong said, "I think personally if they can achieve that, preferably without government involvement, that will be a very major step and it will go a long way in my view to assure people who are now hesitant because they are afraid of being slammed." Netizens were also encouraged by greater calls for e-engagement at all levels including the government. The advisory council is expected to get further feedback and will submit the recommendations to the government by November. -CNA/yt
After reading this newspaper article, I think that creating a virtual speaker's corner may not be entirely effective as people may abuse their power of voicing out their views and factor in sentitive issues and negative remarks that are related to race and religion. Since one cannot stop anyone from doing anything one likes, there will always be people who will create a din.
Although the government has come up with a law that issues related to race and religion are prohibited at the Speaker's corner, there are many others who are trying hard to find ways and means to go against it. As the saying goes, one can only change one's negative behaviours but one will not be able to change one's perception easily. As human beings, we select what views we want to accept and we organise information according to our own personal constructs which we form through the speakers at the corner. For example, one may agree with those who are higher in social role and position. What do you think?
However, I think that the effectiveness of the speaker's corner will be that people are able to communicate through the use of verbal communication which makes thoughts and feelings clearer to the public.
Related Videos
AIMS gets feedback to create virtual Speaker's Corner
SINGAPORE: The advisory council studying the impact of new media had received feedback to create a virtual Speaker's Corner and to repeal the section in the Films Act on party political films. There had been robust and strong criticism of some parts of the committee's report, said the chairman of Advisory Council on the Impact of New Media on Society (AIMS), Cheong Yip Seng. In particular, netizens said a watered-down section of the Films Act on party political films is not going to be effective. And the council saw their point. Mr Cheong said, "You cannot stop people from putting prohibited content on YouTube, you can't do that unless Singapore decides to shut down YouTube, which is not going to happen because the damage for Singapore will be a lot worse than just a repeal of the act." On their part, bloggers at the forum felt if something is to be banned, the powers should not rest with the minister. The issue should be debated by an independent body and decided upon. But when it came to issues of race and religion, even the netizens were not advocating a free for all. Netizens had also suggested that they should come up with a code of practice that can guide discussions online. Mr Cheong said, "I think personally if they can achieve that, preferably without government involvement, that will be a very major step and it will go a long way in my view to assure people who are now hesitant because they are afraid of being slammed." Netizens were also encouraged by greater calls for e-engagement at all levels including the government. The advisory council is expected to get further feedback and will submit the recommendations to the government by November. -CNA/yt
After reading this newspaper article, I think that creating a virtual speaker's corner may not be entirely effective as people may abuse their power of voicing out their views and factor in sentitive issues and negative remarks that are related to race and religion. Since one cannot stop anyone from doing anything one likes, there will always be people who will create a din.
Although the government has come up with a law that issues related to race and religion are prohibited at the Speaker's corner, there are many others who are trying hard to find ways and means to go against it. As the saying goes, one can only change one's negative behaviours but one will not be able to change one's perception easily. As human beings, we select what views we want to accept and we organise information according to our own personal constructs which we form through the speakers at the corner. For example, one may agree with those who are higher in social role and position. What do you think?
However, I think that the effectiveness of the speaker's corner will be that people are able to communicate through the use of verbal communication which makes thoughts and feelings clearer to the public.
3 comments:
Ah! The wonders of the Internet! The internet truly allow people from all walks of life to communicate with each other.
This will allow the government and the public to better share ideas and opinions regarding the running of Singapore.
Notice the commentary on what will happen if Singapore shuts down Youtube. What he means, is that the image (read perception) of Singapore will be damaged. Singapore will not be viewed as a open society if it were to ban youtube as did China if I am not mistaken.
Besides this as an example of verbal communication, I also see a bit of non-verbal communication. It is one thing for the government to say things about itself, but what it does is another matter.
How the government reacts to this matter is an example of non-verbal communication. Giving the go-ahead will tell a lot about the government.
i would agree with you face to face or verbal communication for ppl to discuss about their thought and opinions.
It makes me feel better if i'm able to see the person i'm talking to or with so that i would be able to get some idea how what i'm saying is affecting the person.
The speakers corner is created so that the public can speak their minds. If the government impose certain restrictions, wont it be contradicting the initial intention of the speakers' corner? Indeed certain people will make a din and people will listen. But will they be actually persuaded? I feel Singaporeans can think for themselves.
Post a Comment