SJS6638

28 May 13, 22:32

10 online news sites must follow traditional media regulations: MDA

By Chiu Peace | Yahoo! Newsroom – 3 hours ago

MDA says 10 online news sites must follow the same regulatory framework as traditional media

Ten online news sites that report regularly on Singapore and have significant reach will be required to follow the same regulatory framework as traditional media.

According to a statement issued by the Media Development Authority (MDA) on Tuesday, the 10 online news sites, which include sg.news.yahoo.com, will from Saturday need an individual licence just as traditional news platforms now have. Currently, the online news sites only have a class licence under the Broadcasting Act.

The new licence makes it clear that online news sites are expected to comply within 24 hours to MDA’s directions to remove content that is found to be in breach of content standards, the Singapore media regulator said.

The sites will also be required to put up a performance bond of S$50,000, like all other individually-licensed broadcasters.

MDA said the new licence provides greater clarity on prevailing requirements within the Class Licence and Internet Code of Practice, and also explains what would be considered “prohibited content” in the existing Internet Code of Practice – content that undermines racial or religious harmony, for example.

“As the sites are already subject to these requirements, no change in content standards is expected to result,” MDA said.

Under the licensing framework, online news sites will be individually licensed if they report an average of at least one article per week on Singapore’s news and current affairs over a period of two months, and are visited by at least 50,000 unique IP addresses from Singapore each month over a period of two months.

When the licensing framework is launched, MDA said it will be issuing licensing notifications for the following ten sites: asiaone.com, businesstimes.com.sg, channelnewsasia.com, omy.sg, sg.news.yahoo.com, stomp.com.sg, straitstimes.com, tnp.sg, todayonline.com and zaobao.com.

Aside from the Yahoo! Singapore news site, all the other nine sites are run by Singapore’s two biggest media groups, MediaCorp and Singapore Press Holdings.

_____________________________________

Singapore defends Internet licencing rules

By Bhavan Jaipragas | AFP News – Thu, May 30, 2013

Singapore's media regulator on Thursday sought to allay fears that a controversial new rule requiring news websites to obtain licences was aimed at stifling Internet freedom.

The surprise requirement, which takes effect on Saturday, triggered an outcry in the online community after a popular news site operated by US-based Yahoo! was included among 10 sites subject to licencing.

The rest are all local mainstream news sites and there are fears among bloggers critical of the government that they could be targeted next.

"The new licencing framework is not intended to clamp down on Internet freedom," the Media Development Authority (MDA) said in reply to queries from AFP, adding that it was "not MDA's intent to place onerous obligations" on the licencees.

The MDA on Tuesday said websites that have at least 50,000 unique visitors from Singapore every month and publish at least one local news article per week over a period of two months must obtain an annual licence.

Websites granted a licence will have to remove "prohibited content" such as articles that undermine "racial or religious harmony" within 24 hours of being notified by the authorities.

"The new framework provides greater clarity on prevailing content standards in the Internet Code of Practice and there is no change in content standards," the MDA said, referring to earlier regulations first issued in 1997.

Under the code, prohibited content includes "material that is objectionable on the grounds of public interest, public morality, public order, public security, national harmony, or is otherwise prohibited by applicable Singapore laws."

The MDA said guidelines within the new licencing scheme will clarify the prohibitions.

It cited the "Innocence of Muslims" video that angered the global Islamic community last year as an example of banned content.

Licenced websites will have to put up Sg$50,000 ($39,500) as a "performance bond" that can be forfeited if MDA regulations are not complied with.

"Should any licensee experience difficulties in meeting their licensing requirements, we welcome them to discuss their concerns with us," the MDA said.

Singapore's feisty blogging community has slammed the new rule as the latest government attempt to suppress dissent and encumber independent reporting.

Yahoo! Singapore, which has a team of reporters producing independent coverage, has become a magnet for anti-government comments posted by readers in reaction to local news stories.

The MDA said the licence guidelines will "apply to all content on the news sites, including readers' comments on the news sites".

Singapore is one of Asia's wealthiest and most wired nations but also one of the most regimented.

Its traditional media are widely seen to be pro-government, giving rise to alternative sources of news online amid growing discontent with the ruling party and its policies on immigration, the economy and public services.

SJS6638

28 May 13, 22:33

We still have other websites to visit http://www.tremeritus.com

I believe Yahoo Singapore is already under control by the despots. Yahoo Singapore is not that reliable.

Change words of Singapore pledge to:

............ to build a "democratic" society and progress for our lightning party.

SJS6638

28 May 13, 22:34

That minority group of people in action to protect political interests at the expense of all Singaporeans.

))))))))))

COMMENT: Internet regulation – even MPs and the MLC not consulted?

By Andrew Loh | SingaporeScene – 8 hours ago

Andrew Loh questions MP Baey Yam Keng whether MCI was consulted on the MDA regulations before they were announced. …

As I wrote in an earlier article, after the Media Development Authority (MDA) announced the new set of Internet regulations, the government continues to lose touch with the common man and woman.

The reaction following the announcements of the new laws last Tuesday has been sharp, deeply critical and continues even after six days.

There are two main points to the whole sorry saga of a out-of-touch government flailing to impose control through regulatory fiat, instead of open and transparent consultation and dialogue with stakeholders.

Mostly silence from MPs

One is the entirely abhorrent manner not only in how the regulations were sprung on the public, but also the government’s – and its MPs’ – behaviour following the MDA statement last week.

Ministers and PAP MPs suddenly became totally silent online – except for Baey Yam Keng who gave brief comments to the media. The collective silence is deafening indeed and does not speak well of elected MPs who are supposed to not only be accountable to the public but to also speak up and engage the public on important matters.

There seems to be a coordinated campaign to not engage netizens on the regulations but only to speak to the mainstream media. Bloggers too seem to have been barred from being interviewed or quoted in the local media.

Singaporeans should condemn such cowardly behaviour of elected MPs.

Little consultation

The second point is how easily the government, through its agency of unelected members, can make changes to the law without regard at all for public interest.

The MDA, especially, should be ashamed of how it went about removing what is a citizens’ right to free expression as laid down in our Constitution – “every citizen of Singapore has the right to freedom of speech and expression.”

The only consultation which the MDA did apparently only involved its speaking to “industry players”, whatever that means.

MP Baey Yam Keng, who is the deputy chairman of the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) on Communications and Information, revealed on his Facebook chat with netizens on Sunday night that his committee “was briefed before the announcement was made.”

The MP, whom netizens expressed appreciation for in engaging them on the matter, did not directly answer the question of whether he was involved in the process of crafting, proposing or even scrutinising the regulations in its formatting stages.

If the deputy chairman of the GPC for MCI was not involved, what more of other MPs? No wonder all of them have chosen to remain silent the entire week.

But they could also perhaps be unhappy with the regulations and how they were sprung on everyone. This is not implausible as even Baey said that he preferred education and trusting the public to make the right judgements on things online.

'Not the solution'

Another person who would be against such regulation would be the chairman of the Media Literacy Council (MLC), which also seems to be rather quiet and has not made any statements to the media on the regulations.

Its chairman, Tan Cheng Han, told the Straits Times last year that regulating the Internet was “not the solution”.

"His remarks sought to assuage fears among some in blogosphere that the council, convened by the Government, will impose rules to govern online behaviour,” the Straits Times reported. "Prof Tan also believes the government has no intention of using a code of conduct as a regulatory tool."

He said: "I don't think it was ever on the cards that netizens must comply or else face criminal sanctions."

It would be good if Tan and his council could state their positions now on the new MDA regulations.

Call for withdrawal

A group of bloggers and online practitioners, known as #FreeMyInternet, has come together to call for the withdrawal of the regulations.

It is the right thing to call for.

A right that is guaranteed in the Constitution should not and must not be so easily and conveniently circumscribed, pared down or removed by unelected, faceless bureaucrats with a stroke of the pen.

The government has explained that the matter did not have to go through Parliament because the changes are subsidiary ones, and not an Act itself. That is being technical. There have been instances when the government tabled issues in the House for debate – such as the population White Paper and ministerial salaries – which aren’t Acts by themselves too.

So, why not table the proposed regulations before the House?

Surely, curbing Singaporeans’ constitutionally guaranteed right to free expression is a major issue which must be discussed and debated openly, and not decided in a completely opaque manner by some bureaucrats behind closed doors.

Non-legally binding clarifications

The MDA and the Minister for Communications and Information, Yaacob Ibrahim, belatedly sought to explain and assuage fears emerging from last week’s announcement. But these are not binding legally.

The MDA, for example, issued a statement which it posted on its Facebook page, saying that “an individual publishing views on current affairs and trends on his/her personal website or blog does not amount to news reporting.”

How is that legally binding? Or even legally credible? And how was this definition of what amounts to “news reporting” was made? Arbitrarily? Is that how our regulations are created? Should Singaporeans be expected to observe such arbitrary laws?

And Yaacob giving assurances through the media is just as irrelevant.

If the minister and the MDA mean what they say, why not include these in the regulations themselves?

Otherwise, the government should explain how is it that a bureaucrat has such powers over elected MPs and Parliament, to sign off on regulations which affect everyone in the country.

It is thus correct and responsible for bloggers and netizens – and in fact, all Singaporeans (because the regulations affect more than just bloggers) – to come together and reject outright what is effectively the usurpation of our rights by the State, done in the most opaque and irrational manner, by nameless and unaccountable civil servants.

The #FreeMyInternet campaign is not just a group of bloggers trying to do this with a protest at Hong Lim Park on 8 June - it is also a demonstration, hopefully a powerful one, to the PAP Government that it will no longer be allowed to do as it pleases.

All Singaporeans should pause and ponder on this: if your rights are so easily removed, the next time you face a problem and need help, who will you turn to? How will you speak – when all the State has to do to shut you up is to issue you a “take-down order”?

SJS6638

28 May 13, 22:38

asiaone.com, businesstimes.com.sg, channelnewsasia.com, omy.sg, sg.news.yahoo.com, stomp.com.sg, straitstimes.com, tnp.sg, todayonline.com and zaobao.com.

The above media already under their control, why is MDA still wayang wayang to say issue licence?

Summer hill

28 May 13, 22:42

maybe we are on the list. :lol:

Mr Milo

28 May 13, 22:48

:?: we are a news website? :?: :lol: well, at most we could be like the TV show: The Noose :lol:

PJ_Quek

29 May 13, 13:06

Originally posted by Mr Milo:

we are a news website?

well, at most we could be like the TV show: The Noose

This season's noose is not as funny as before liao.

Summer hill

29 May 13, 20:51

Govt trying to install a state of fear.

Mr Milo

29 May 13, 21:38

i ain't afraid of ghosts :lol:

SJS6638

29 May 13, 22:18

Originally posted by Summer hill:

Govt trying to install a state of fear.

Bingo.

laurence82

29 May 13, 22:38

stomp is a news website

i do not want to live anymore

SJS6638

29 May 13, 22:43

oh no, you sound morbid

SJS6638

31 May 13, 22:11