“With the Internet technology now being made commercially available to everyone, there has been a swift awareness and application of the Internet as an avenue for discussing and raising issues related to politics. In Singapore, where political expression is controlled, the Internet therefore offers an opportunity for many to express their views and use different techniques, tools and methods of delivery for political communication. The ruling PAP that enjoys dominant coverage in the traditional media does not want competing political ideas to have a wide reach. It therefore introduced regulations regarding content in 1996 as well as amendments to the Parliamentary Elections Act in 2001 to restrict usage.”

“It is only in late 2001 that the PAP launched its own party website. Hitherto, the PAP had promoted its position within the various government websites. The ruling party had been reluctant to publicise itself as distinct from the government because this sheltered it from criticism directed at the party. Hence, this is a significant departure from the PAP’s usual efforts to present itself as a national institution rather than a party with partisan interests, a departure forced on it by the Internet. But that departure wasn’t easy. This can be discerned from the “Conditions of Access” found on it’s website. It categorically lists a series of conditions for anyone accessing, viewing and downloading material from it’s website. It doesn’t want to be held liable for contents through it’s links, chat rooms and discussion groups (which are not even set up!) and in addition makes no warranties about the accuracy, reliability, completeness or timelessness of its website and it’s contents. The three page “Conditions of Access” on its website reveals the inherent anxiety of the PAP when it finds itself out in the open and in an interactive domain policed by the very laws that it has introduced. This in part explains the efforts to continuously legislate and control all forms of political communication on the Internet or to place disclaimers on its own communication. And by extension explains the PAP’s reluctance to interact openly in political debate with its opponents on equal terms.”

Tune in next week for Chapter Three “Singapore: The Modern Police State”