Previous Politech article: "Singapore orders political websites to register with government" http://www.politechbot.com/p-02257.html --- http://www.sintercom.org/sba We were asked by Singapore Broadcasting Authority (SBA) to register Sintercom under their "Singapore Broadcasting Authority (Class Licence) Notification 1996" on 5th July 2001. Here is the letter. After receive this letter, we starting to think about our options. These are: 1. To move Sintercom overseas Sintercom started overseas at Stanford University anyway, and moving it back to Silicon Valley where it started is very easy. The only problem is that going overseas will contradicts our belief that it is possible for openness to exist in Singapore, and that frank and open discussion of issues is good for the future of our country. Besides, I am now working in Singapore so moving only the web site but not myself overseas is not a complete solution. This brings us to option 2. 2. To appeal with SBA I started the process by writing them a letter asking them why they have decided to revoke the exemption, hoping to start a dialogue, which hopefully could lead to sufficient mutual understanding, which will make a successful appeal possible. However, their reply was a reiteration of their original demand without any attempt to engage my query. I conclude from this that SBA does not wish to have any dialogue with Sintercom. This brings us to option 3. 3. To stop operations and close down Sintercom Since a lot of my free time is taken up by the running of Sintercom, this is a very attractive option. If I can slowly scale back my public activities, I will have more leisure time for myself (BTW, anyone interested in taking over from me please write. I have been running Sintercom since 1994 and am about ready to move on). The only thing holding me back is our belief (maybe people who are more wise might perhaps say our naiveté) that it is still possible, even when election is near, to speak frankly for the good of the country. So this brings us to option 4. 4. To register with SBA as they have demanded We have sent in the forms to SBA on 17 July 2001. Two things in the registration forms struck me. One is obvious: on Form B2, the webmaster must declare that he/she takes full responsibility for all the content on the website, regardless of whether or not he/she had any editorial control. Fortunately, when I searched the SBA website, I found a clause in their code of practice that made this declaration more reasonable: (3) An Internet Content Provider discharges his obligation under this Code:- (a) in relation to private discussion fora hosted on his service (eg. chat groups), when the licensee chooses discussion themes which are not prohibited under the guidelines in clause 4 below; This means that instead of having to actively read every single line that appears on our web-based chat, the webmaster needs only choose theme that are not prohibited. We only have three themes in our Forum: Kopitiam style general discussion, food, and forum self-governance. All seem alright to me. The other content, such as the Not The ST Forum, might have more problems and I shall come to them later. The other thing that struck me but only later was that on the annex to Form B2 page 2, the webmaster must provide not only he/her personal information like IC, address, phone and email (naturally, the webmaster must be identifiable and contactable by SBA), but also his employer's contact and monthly salary, regardless of whether the web site has anything to do with the webmaster's place of work. Why does SBA need to identify and/or contact the employer? I do not know, but have dutifully provided that information as well. Filling in forms was easy. Now, the question becomes: What does registration means for Sintercom? How can we comply? As I see it, there are these ways: 1. To start erring on the side of caution, to hold back anything we think could remotely offend anyone, in short, to self-censor. This is not a viable option for us especially since it goes against our belief that it is possible for Singaporeans living in Singapore to speak their minds frankly because we do so with the best interest of Singapore at heart. To self-censor now defeats the purpose of our existence. So, this brings us to option 2. 2. To pretend as if we did not register and operate as before Unfortunately this is not possible since the clauses "i. against the public interest, public order or national harmony; or ii. offends against good taste or decency" is so vague that almost anything in Sintercom could conceivably be construed as such. I do not want to be in a situation where I could be hauled into court anytime, depending on how someone in power has decided to interpret content in Sintercom. This leads to option 3. 3. To send everything we published to SBA for clearance And we will censor anything that SBA tells us should be censored. We shall assume that if SBA clears certain content or does not reply to object to it, that particular content is kosher. In the SBA website, under the code of practice, it is stated that: (3) An Internet Content Provider discharges his obligation under this Code:- (b) in relation to programmes on his service contributed by other persons who are invited to do so on the licensee's service for public display (eg. bulletin boards), when the licensee denies access to any contributions that contain prohibited material that he discovers in the normal course of exercising his editorial duties, or is informed about; And in the Singapore Broadcasting Authority Act (chapter 297) it is stated that: 15. If any doubt arises as to whether a licensee has used its best efforts in compliance with the conditions of this licence, the licensee shall be treated as having used its best efforts if it satisfies the Authority that it took all reasonable steps in the circumstances. I do not know what SBA defines as "all reasonable steps" but will assume that by furnishing SBA with everything instead of letting SBA discover content they object to and than having to inform us, we have taken "all reasonable steps". What we gain by doing this is that we will get clear and timely indication from SBA about our content. We protect ourselves from being accused of wilfully displaying content that contradicts section (x) article (y) of their code because the content had been up for 3 months and we did nothing to take it down. In this way, we will not self-censor, but we let SBA censor us whenever they like. This is not foolproof (nothing is) as someone could just set up another site overseas called NOT The Sintercom Site to archive all the censored stuff. But that person will not be me and it would not be within my control what happens overseas. Many things could still go wrong. We will try to hold fast to our belief and principals as much as we can as new problems crop up. If future problems are too numerous or too insurmountable, we could still close down Sintercom. Of course, we hope that day will never come. If it does, it would be a dark day indeed. Finally, I would humbly suggest to the government my belief that the most effective way to address worries about its good name being slandered is to engage critics in open debates. The Internet is neutral. It can spread slander about the government just as fast as it can spread slander about others. Likewise, it can spread good things about the government just as fast as it can spread good things about others. The Net is merely a neutral though powerful medium of communications. If the government is worried about the Net spreading slander faster than good things about it, it might want to do some exhaustive investigation why this is so. Trying to prevent differing views from appearing on the Net does not fundamentally address or resolve dissent. In the long run, trying to regulate discussion of issues on the Net will do more harm than good. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice. To subscribe, visit http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jul 17 2001 - 08:55:20 PDT