Yes it does. Footages and images depicting violence and aggression within the media may result in an overall detrimental effect on a person, stirring violent instincts within him, For example, as shown in the internationally recognized bobo doll experiment, a child exposed to footages of violent behaviour performed by a human being onto a bobo doll was found to exhibit violent tendencies and attack the doll in a savage manner. Furthermore, continuous exposure to such violence reinforces this negative effect, sending subliminal messages to the complex human mind. For example, a study conducted in Canada found that Canadians had less violent tendencies as compared to their American counterparts because they were exposed to less violence in the media on a daily basis.
-Chelsia, Yadi, Yande, Joel, Shiyang
09S06J
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Does media violence have an effect on human behaviour?
People generally do not go around committing heinous acts of violence even with the large amount of violent content in the media. The number of people watching violent films like "Old Boy" number in the millions, but there has been been a small number of incidents that have been linked to it (eg. Virginia Tech). Therefore, we can safely say that the argument for media viomence affecting human behavioiur is a hasty and unqualified generalization.
:) - serena, arjun, kersh, jamie, senghenk
:) - serena, arjun, kersh, jamie, senghenk
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Freedom of the Press: Minister of Home Affairs from 09S07A
Good morning one and all. I am Wong Kan Seng, Minister of Home Affairs, and I am here today to present my views on media censorship in Singapore. The first and foremost duty of the government is to protect its people. In the MHA, the welfare, safety and security of the public is our priority. As such, we are very particular about filtering information that could potentially harm them in any way. Media censorship in Singapore has to be stringent in order to avoid unnecessary conflict.
Firstly, media censorship in Singapore must be strict to prevent dissemination in our small community. Singaporeans must live and work in harmony as a tightly bonded community for the development of Singapore. Biased content in the media could pose a threat to this peace by stimulating negative feeling toward people of different cultures. In 2005, two men were charged in court under the Sedition Act for criticizing and insulting Muslim customs using online posts. If censorship action had not been taken, the Muslim community would have been angered, and the biased ideas and opinions of Muslims could have been spread throughout society. Such a scenario occurred in December 1950. The Maria Hertogh riots broke out over the custody of Maria Hertogh, and the biasness in the colonial system toward Muslims. The English and Malay press(es) both added fuel to the fire by depicting Maria’s emotions in favour of the side they were biased for. Blood was shed in the riots. I feel that such an event cannot be allowed to take place again. To prevent our community from sliding into such social disorder, and to instead preserve racial harmony, ethnocentric or any biased content in the media would have to be filtered out.
The impact of the media on all who subscribe to it is undeniable and inevitable to an extent. Its influence is especially evident amongst the impressionable youth, who attempt to emulate the culture marketed by the media as fashionable. At an age where they’re quite vulnerable and susceptible, it is imperative we filter the information they receive. One reason for this is to preserve our unique Asian culture. With the media dominated and dictated by the Westerners, their values and opinions tend to be imposed on the viewers. Even if it propagates views and actions that are generally an accepted social norm, it may not exactly tie in with our Asian culture. When grappling between two worlds like this, they tend to pick the option that’s considered ‘cooler’. Increasingly, chopsticks are swapped for forks and spoons and saris willingly exchanged for shirt and jeans. While cultural homogenization does have its benefits, by succumbing to the western culture, we’re compromising on our own traditional rituals.
Also, there is a need to restrict our youths’ exposure to controversy and obscenity through the media, who at their age can be quite easily swayed and influenced. With constant exposure to obscene content over the media, Singaporean youths would eventually deviate from the expectations of societal norms. This threat is especially pertinent to Singapore as our most valuable resource is our small population - allowing our youths to stray would be detrimental to Singapore’s future as these youths would become our future leaders in years to come. Thus, close management of local media is essential to ensure that Singaporean youths would uphold good moral values and not be negatively affected by unwanted content in the media.
Done by: Christian, Nikhita, Yik Sin, Yuwen, Emily from 09S07A
Firstly, media censorship in Singapore must be strict to prevent dissemination in our small community. Singaporeans must live and work in harmony as a tightly bonded community for the development of Singapore. Biased content in the media could pose a threat to this peace by stimulating negative feeling toward people of different cultures. In 2005, two men were charged in court under the Sedition Act for criticizing and insulting Muslim customs using online posts. If censorship action had not been taken, the Muslim community would have been angered, and the biased ideas and opinions of Muslims could have been spread throughout society. Such a scenario occurred in December 1950. The Maria Hertogh riots broke out over the custody of Maria Hertogh, and the biasness in the colonial system toward Muslims. The English and Malay press(es) both added fuel to the fire by depicting Maria’s emotions in favour of the side they were biased for. Blood was shed in the riots. I feel that such an event cannot be allowed to take place again. To prevent our community from sliding into such social disorder, and to instead preserve racial harmony, ethnocentric or any biased content in the media would have to be filtered out.
The impact of the media on all who subscribe to it is undeniable and inevitable to an extent. Its influence is especially evident amongst the impressionable youth, who attempt to emulate the culture marketed by the media as fashionable. At an age where they’re quite vulnerable and susceptible, it is imperative we filter the information they receive. One reason for this is to preserve our unique Asian culture. With the media dominated and dictated by the Westerners, their values and opinions tend to be imposed on the viewers. Even if it propagates views and actions that are generally an accepted social norm, it may not exactly tie in with our Asian culture. When grappling between two worlds like this, they tend to pick the option that’s considered ‘cooler’. Increasingly, chopsticks are swapped for forks and spoons and saris willingly exchanged for shirt and jeans. While cultural homogenization does have its benefits, by succumbing to the western culture, we’re compromising on our own traditional rituals.
Also, there is a need to restrict our youths’ exposure to controversy and obscenity through the media, who at their age can be quite easily swayed and influenced. With constant exposure to obscene content over the media, Singaporean youths would eventually deviate from the expectations of societal norms. This threat is especially pertinent to Singapore as our most valuable resource is our small population - allowing our youths to stray would be detrimental to Singapore’s future as these youths would become our future leaders in years to come. Thus, close management of local media is essential to ensure that Singaporean youths would uphold good moral values and not be negatively affected by unwanted content in the media.
Done by: Christian, Nikhita, Yik Sin, Yuwen, Emily from 09S07A
Discuss whether media violence influences human behaviour.
Prolonged exposure to violence in the media may desensitise people, causing them to behave in aggressive or hurtful ways towards others. In the long run, these behaviours may manifest in various forms of crimes, such as murder and rape. For example, the movies "Natural Born Killers", "Child's Play 3", "Money Train" and "Old Boy", all which contain scenes of violence, have been said to have inspired specific criminal acts of violence. Therefore, prolonged exposure to media violence does affect the way humans act.
- Baorong, Bryan, Melissa, Ruisi (09S06J)
- Baorong, Bryan, Melissa, Ruisi (09S06J)
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
(long awaited) Minister of Home Affairs: Media Censorship in Singapore - Role played by the Government
The Singapore Government always takes into account the concerns and values of the majority of Singaporeans. We understand that some Singaporeans frown upon the media censorship implemented by the Singapore Government, however, we have to realize that Singapore is a relatively conservative nation. While most of our younger generations of Singaporeans are exposed to Western culture which tend to be more liberal towards media censorship, we cannot forget the family values that bind our nation together. Ever since Singapore became independent in 1965, respecting family values has been the foundation for our growth. When the rating system for movies was first introduced in 1991 with the R(A) rating to allow those aged 18 years and above to watch more adult-type films, there was a wave of objection among the general population who are family-oriented. Hence, the rating system was revised and the age limit was lifted from 18 to 21 years old.
In regulating media censorship, the Government has to balance between providing greater space for free expression and the values upheld by the majority. Over the years, media censorship has been relaxed to provide greater freedom for the younger generations of Singaporeans to express their views on issues that concern them. For example, The Straits Times started a column 'YOUthink' in 2005 for youths to express their views on issues of their concern. Channels such as the Speakers' Corner have been in place for our citizens to voice out their concerns regarding the well-being of Singapore. A five-minute registration is all it takes for anyone above the age of 21 to contribute at the Speakers' Corner.
Having said that, the Government has to maintain control over the freedom of media in Singapore. Since the media is the window of the public to the world, it is important for the Government to filter out the dust in the air so that our people can grow up in a healthy environment. The cleanliness of our room will directly and indirectly affect the prosperity of our nation. Keeping out "inappropriate" information has always been the stand of the Government. We want our people to remain united as one in times of crisis. While the Government does not doubt the media maturity of our people, we have to ensure that there is no one being left out in our pursuit for public morality. A black sheep could essentially destroy a whole group of people.
We believe that Singaporeans are mature enough to make the right choice. However that does not necessarily mean that they are rational all the time. People do stray from their values sometimes, whether out of curiosity, pressure or just for fun. The younger generations may be curious about the content of a R21 film compared to, say a M18 or NC16 film. Some teenagers believe that they are mature enough to be exposed to adult content without being influenced. Is this belief mature? This of course does not apply only to films. It extends to video games, articles, advertisements and speech.
As can be seen, media is all-encompassing and has a role in every aspect of our lives. Media is also a major source of influence and could affect important matters such as internal security and public morality. As such, there is need on the Government's part to ensure that content damaging towards society or having negative influences does not harm the people of this country. Hence, although the people keen on Western ideologies might criticise that the Singapore Government does not allow freedom of media, we believe that this is a necessary evil to protect our country.
In regulating media censorship, the Government has to balance between providing greater space for free expression and the values upheld by the majority. Over the years, media censorship has been relaxed to provide greater freedom for the younger generations of Singaporeans to express their views on issues that concern them. For example, The Straits Times started a column 'YOUthink' in 2005 for youths to express their views on issues of their concern. Channels such as the Speakers' Corner have been in place for our citizens to voice out their concerns regarding the well-being of Singapore. A five-minute registration is all it takes for anyone above the age of 21 to contribute at the Speakers' Corner.
Having said that, the Government has to maintain control over the freedom of media in Singapore. Since the media is the window of the public to the world, it is important for the Government to filter out the dust in the air so that our people can grow up in a healthy environment. The cleanliness of our room will directly and indirectly affect the prosperity of our nation. Keeping out "inappropriate" information has always been the stand of the Government. We want our people to remain united as one in times of crisis. While the Government does not doubt the media maturity of our people, we have to ensure that there is no one being left out in our pursuit for public morality. A black sheep could essentially destroy a whole group of people.
We believe that Singaporeans are mature enough to make the right choice. However that does not necessarily mean that they are rational all the time. People do stray from their values sometimes, whether out of curiosity, pressure or just for fun. The younger generations may be curious about the content of a R21 film compared to, say a M18 or NC16 film. Some teenagers believe that they are mature enough to be exposed to adult content without being influenced. Is this belief mature? This of course does not apply only to films. It extends to video games, articles, advertisements and speech.
As can be seen, media is all-encompassing and has a role in every aspect of our lives. Media is also a major source of influence and could affect important matters such as internal security and public morality. As such, there is need on the Government's part to ensure that content damaging towards society or having negative influences does not harm the people of this country. Hence, although the people keen on Western ideologies might criticise that the Singapore Government does not allow freedom of media, we believe that this is a necessary evil to protect our country.
Public Forum: Far East Economic Review Senior Editor
Role of Press in ensuring national security and public morals
- Ensuring national security is not the equivalent of censoring the opposition, the arts, and entertainment
- Role of press is in constantly questioning the government and its policies in order to provide for greater transparency and accountability on bothends
- Role of press is not in securing short term/superficial stability, but in long term progress and national security as a whole
- Everyone is exposed to the media, the fourth estate, hence the media has a responsibility to the nation and the people to stimulate and not stunt the political climate
- A press which over-censors itself compromises itself and its own beliefs
Censorship is detrimental to the arts, media, and the government
- Over-Censorship eg. the banning of FEER is not the behaviour of a prosperous, self-confident nation, and this image is projected to the rest of the world, making it detrimental to the image of the government
- If information can be blocked and manipulated by the government, then Singapore will be unable to develop a strong knowledge based economy, or a knowledge based society.
- Singaporeans will be unable to hold the government accountable and be sure that what the leaders say is the truth
- Image of insecurity is a signal sent out to the general populace as well as the international community as a whole
- Government may not be mature in stunting the creative juices of the arts scene by practising such censorship.
-09S06J Cassia, Claire, Chenxuan, Yongsheng, Shiyang
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Freedom of the press : Speech by FEER senior editor
Greetings to one and all. I am a very senior editor from the world famous magazine, Far Eastern Economic Review. For the benefit of the ignorant, the FEER is a very popular magazine which regularly publishes reports that cover key topics in Asia. These reports are very informative and important to the marketeres, businessmen and also academics. We have many wonderful side-publications such as "China's Elite", "Managing in Asia" just to name a few. We regularly publish special reports focusing on topics relevant and significant to Asia. Such innovative ideas by my colleagues and myself have won the magazine many awards such as the "Excellence in Specialized Reporting" by Society of Publishers in Asia, the Honourable Mention for Magazine Front COver Design by SoPA and the Excellence in Magazines by SOPA.
Now that I've introduced the magazine i am in charge of, let me move on to the main topic which we are all gathered here for today. Fortunately, we have freedom of speech here and I am free to express my most sincere and honest opinion on this issue which i am unable to do so when in Singapore. Honestly speaking, the government do not want people to think for themselves but are trying their best to indoctrinate their own set of political and social values into the Singapore citizens. This is the reason why they keep targeting my magazine and colleagues whenever we publish the truth which they feel is inappropriate for people to know. In the late 1970's, my poor colleague, Mr Derek Davies, was sued by Lee Kwan Yew for participating in a"diabolical international COmmunist plot" to poison relations between Singapore and Malaysia. In the 1980s, Lee banned my magazine in Singapore after it published an article about the detentin of Roman Catholic church workers. It seems like time after time, we are being victimized by the overpowering forces or the government. However, that did not have much of an impact on my magazine as we have publications worldwide. In 2006, we were sued again by Lee Kwan Yew for defamation as we suggested that they were corrupt, but what we stated were all facts! Then they banned our magazine totally, and the poor deprived citizens could not even subscribe to our journals. Now after telling you all this, you may be thinking that i have been complaining about my plight. Actually, we are feeling more sorry for the citizens of Singapore rather than ourselves, because it really doesnt matter whether we can make sales or not in Singapore, we got the world in our hands. However, the poor Singaporeans will no longer have the chance to read the valuable insights on issues concerning them in our magazines anymore. They will be spoon-fed by the government, forced to believe that whatever the government says is correct. While you may think ignorance is bliss and argue that they are still living quite happily and are prosperous, what i want you to know is that being ignorant is defintely not a good thing. You may think that your life is perfectly fine now, but you do not know how much better it could actually have been if not for all the restrictions. I would not like to speak more on this issue as i am worried that somehow i will get fined like my fellow colleagues. To end off this speech, I would just like to remind Singaporeans not to believe everything the government says. Have a mind of your own, dare to voice out your opinions... Thank you.
Done by: Shi Hua, Samantha, Lin Bo, Eileen, Vincent 09SO7A
Friday, February 22, 2008
Public Forum on Press Freedom: Hi, I Am Xiaxue.
(Disclaimer: The following content was fabricated by a deluded RJ girl at 12am)
Hi my real name is Wendy Cheng, but better known as Xiaxue, Singapore’s most popular blogger! I like pink, sex, and my cutesy angmor boyfriend.
1. I am very sorry but I cannot comment on the issue of press freedom. Later I say something wrong, then they shut me down. Who shut me down? The gahmen will shut my blog down, so cannot cannot cannot say anything, my lips are sealed.
2. Actually horh, my opinion is: Everyone should be allowed to do what they want to, and no one should curb those rights!
Everyone is entitled to his/her personal freedoms, Freedom of expression is especially important;
3. Why do we need censorship anyway? Is it necessary?
4. It it’s an issue of being offended…
- No one is forcing you to do what you don’t want to do: If you don’t like it, don’t read/watch/listen to it!
- Don’t complain about the media/my blog à If got nasty things, then JUST DON’T WATCH/READ LAH.
5. If it’s an issue of protection, I think it’s all Chicken Ba-Ba.
- If you don’t want your children to see/hear it, then don’t let them!
- But if they find out anyway, just as well! They cannot always look out on the world through rose-tinted lenses (btw I like pink)
- They should grow up and be exposed
- Besides, if they end up being continually exposed to such media, it means that want to be = they enjoy such things = let them do what they want to (let them have FUN)
6. Censorship is a personal choice
- People have the power of choice
- They can make their own decisions as to what they want to absorb.
- They are responsible enough to know what they can watch/read/listen to.
7. Criticizing people is a different matter
- Being offended is a choice: you choose whether you are offended or not
- So don’t take offense lor!
- AND DON’T OFFEND ME, THE GREATEST BLOGGER EVER.
* Don’t call me short, don’t call me fat. I MAY BE BOTH, BUT DON’T NEED TO TELL ME AGAIN AND AGAIN!
* I am not Ah-lian, I am not bimbotic, I am not a slut and I am not stupid: I got a damn high PSLE Aggregate kthxbye.
Done By: Abigail Ho, Ewen Chong, Goh Ying Ying, Jonathan Neo, Toh Xue Qian
[09S07A]
Hi my real name is Wendy Cheng, but better known as Xiaxue, Singapore’s most popular blogger! I like pink, sex, and my cutesy angmor boyfriend.
1. I am very sorry but I cannot comment on the issue of press freedom. Later I say something wrong, then they shut me down. Who shut me down? The gahmen will shut my blog down, so cannot cannot cannot say anything, my lips are sealed.
2. Actually horh, my opinion is: Everyone should be allowed to do what they want to, and no one should curb those rights!
Everyone is entitled to his/her personal freedoms, Freedom of expression is especially important;
3. Why do we need censorship anyway? Is it necessary?
4. It it’s an issue of being offended…
- No one is forcing you to do what you don’t want to do: If you don’t like it, don’t read/watch/listen to it!
- Don’t complain about the media/my blog à If got nasty things, then JUST DON’T WATCH/READ LAH.
5. If it’s an issue of protection, I think it’s all Chicken Ba-Ba.
- If you don’t want your children to see/hear it, then don’t let them!
- But if they find out anyway, just as well! They cannot always look out on the world through rose-tinted lenses (btw I like pink)
- They should grow up and be exposed
- Besides, if they end up being continually exposed to such media, it means that want to be = they enjoy such things = let them do what they want to (let them have FUN)
6. Censorship is a personal choice
- People have the power of choice
- They can make their own decisions as to what they want to absorb.
- They are responsible enough to know what they can watch/read/listen to.
7. Criticizing people is a different matter
- Being offended is a choice: you choose whether you are offended or not
- So don’t take offense lor!
- AND DON’T OFFEND ME, THE GREATEST BLOGGER EVER.
* Don’t call me short, don’t call me fat. I MAY BE BOTH, BUT DON’T NEED TO TELL ME AGAIN AND AGAIN!
* I am not Ah-lian, I am not bimbotic, I am not a slut and I am not stupid: I got a damn high PSLE Aggregate kthxbye.
Done By: Abigail Ho, Ewen Chong, Goh Ying Ying, Jonathan Neo, Toh Xue Qian
[09S07A]
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Decide if FEA is right in censoring films & the rationale behind it.
As a group, we feel that the FEA is not justified in having strict standards on films screened in Singapore.
Firstly, many people feel that censoring & cutting too many scenes from films destroys their originality. The director of any film has his/her own reason & purpose for every scene placed in the film. As such, the intended message he/she wants the audience to understand may be lost after those cuts by the FEA, & thus the film may be less impactful.
Secondly, the public is also sensible enough and has the right to discern for himself/herself what is right or wrong when they watch films. Since there are specified ratings given to a particular film, it is already restricted as to who gets to watch the show. As such, only those who have the rough required level of maturity are allowed to watch a certain rated film. As for the cuts, they are unnecessary as the audience for a specific film, who is already expected to have a more or less acceptable level of maturity, has the ability and right to judge for oneself as to what takeaways one has, and what actions/behaviour to perform as a result of watching the rated film.
On the other hand, the reason behind FEA having strict standards on films is to protect public morals. Since Singapore is known to be a conservative society (compared to other countries like the U.S.), ratings given for a certain film by the media censorship boards of other countries might be different from that of the FEA. Hence, there is a need for the FEA to review all the films to be screened publicly to decide what should be viewed by the public, and not blindly following other countries' ratings on films.
By Joel, Brian, Serena & Chelsia (09S06J)
Firstly, many people feel that censoring & cutting too many scenes from films destroys their originality. The director of any film has his/her own reason & purpose for every scene placed in the film. As such, the intended message he/she wants the audience to understand may be lost after those cuts by the FEA, & thus the film may be less impactful.
Secondly, the public is also sensible enough and has the right to discern for himself/herself what is right or wrong when they watch films. Since there are specified ratings given to a particular film, it is already restricted as to who gets to watch the show. As such, only those who have the rough required level of maturity are allowed to watch a certain rated film. As for the cuts, they are unnecessary as the audience for a specific film, who is already expected to have a more or less acceptable level of maturity, has the ability and right to judge for oneself as to what takeaways one has, and what actions/behaviour to perform as a result of watching the rated film.
On the other hand, the reason behind FEA having strict standards on films is to protect public morals. Since Singapore is known to be a conservative society (compared to other countries like the U.S.), ratings given for a certain film by the media censorship boards of other countries might be different from that of the FEA. Hence, there is a need for the FEA to review all the films to be screened publicly to decide what should be viewed by the public, and not blindly following other countries' ratings on films.
By Joel, Brian, Serena & Chelsia (09S06J)
Public Forum on Freedom of the Press in Singapore - Hotseating Chee Soon Juan's perspective
1. Hypocrisy- Singapore is a democracy, but people don't have access to information about the other political parties in the frame, for instance near the elections there might be about 10 pages describing the good things doesn't by the PAP whereas opposition would have to contend with just one page. hence since the people know about the others in the frame, they would end up voting for the PAP.
2. Though the government sees the press as an independent organization and one which is run independent of the government, it keeps in place some of the members of the government in the board of directors of the organization and close aids as senior editors who would mostly present information from the point of view of the government, even though they maintain there are an independent organization.
3. The government has put in place numerous measures to restrict the freedom of speech. OB markers being one of them, they really don't allow the people to think out of the box and when they put in place the measures of feedback, like the speakers corner, then there are numerous restrictions, so in the end it justs defeats its purpose
4. Support for FEER, because it was also wanting the betterment of the country, but took a different path and thus were condemned by the government thus having their license being canceled/ or worse for me being put into jail
2. Though the government sees the press as an independent organization and one which is run independent of the government, it keeps in place some of the members of the government in the board of directors of the organization and close aids as senior editors who would mostly present information from the point of view of the government, even though they maintain there are an independent organization.
3. The government has put in place numerous measures to restrict the freedom of speech. OB markers being one of them, they really don't allow the people to think out of the box and when they put in place the measures of feedback, like the speakers corner, then there are numerous restrictions, so in the end it justs defeats its purpose
4. Support for FEER, because it was also wanting the betterment of the country, but took a different path and thus were condemned by the government thus having their license being canceled/ or worse for me being put into jail
Public Forum on Freedom of the Press in Singapore - Hotseating the Senior Editor of the Straits Times
Good morning ladies and gentlemen, I am Patrick Daniel, senior editor of the Straits Times newspaper and I'm here today to share my views on media censorship in Singapore. I believe that all of you are aware that presently, our country practises media censorship. Everyone here may have differing views on the necessity of media censorship in Singapore today. However, all of us here at the Straits Times believe that it is absolutely essential, based on several reasons.
Firstly, media censorship is essential as it protects national security. It is of vital importance to hold on to information that would endanger national defense and not let such information be recklessly publicised to the general public. For example, after 9/11, the probability of similar terrorist attacks on Singapore is a powerful argument for restricting information that would assist such attacks, by identifying targets or revealing plans to combat them. The censorship of such national security information would definitely be in the Singapore’s interest as it would keep the country out of harm’s way, making the country a safer and more secure place to live in. The media can be considered as indirectly accountable for the lives of its citizens, and thus should be taking responsibility by restricting the publication of such information.
Secondly, media censorship is also necessary so as to protect public morals against defamation, obscenity and blasphemy. Adequate media censorship would ensure that the people in Singapore, especially the youth, would be less exposed to such profanity and indecency. In a TIME magazine poll conducted on 20th March 2005, 53% of respondents said that they think broadcast-channel shows depicting sex and violence should be more strictly controlled, 68% believe that the entertainment industry has lost touch with viewers' moral standards, and 50% believe that there is too much sexual content on television today. From this, we can see that people do feel that the media today is threatening public morals. Also, on December 10th 2003, Fox failed to censor the F-word and the S-word during the Billboard Music Awards. The shocking thing is that there were over 2 million 2-17 year olds watching the awards. This comprised more than 20% of total viewers for the awards. As such, it is evident that adequate media censorship would enable the youth in Singapore to be less exposed to such profanity and indecency.
Lastly, the press should not go against the national agenda, but instead work for the progress of our country. In order to do so, media censorship is required to ensure that the material published to the public is accurate and in the best interests of our country, working towards what Singapore hopes to achieve as a nation. After all, one of the purposes of the press is to act as a communication tool between our government and our people, and therefore it is important that the press goes side-by-side with our national agenda, to ensure the people get the right impression of our government’s objectives and operations.
From what I have mentioned so far about the importance of media censorship, it may seem that we are biased towards the government, or pro-PAP, but I hope to dispel this incorrect notion that some of you here might have towards us. It is important to note that although we are subordinate to the government, we are an independent newspaper. As such, encouraging media censorship is from a rational and fair perspective and is in no way due to the influence from the government.
I sincerely hope that after listening to what I have mentioned so far, all of you here would understand the importance and necessity of media censorship in our country, and that media censorship must continue to be advocated in order for Singapore to progress.
Done by: Joel, Brian, Serena & Chelsia (09S06J)
Firstly, media censorship is essential as it protects national security. It is of vital importance to hold on to information that would endanger national defense and not let such information be recklessly publicised to the general public. For example, after 9/11, the probability of similar terrorist attacks on Singapore is a powerful argument for restricting information that would assist such attacks, by identifying targets or revealing plans to combat them. The censorship of such national security information would definitely be in the Singapore’s interest as it would keep the country out of harm’s way, making the country a safer and more secure place to live in. The media can be considered as indirectly accountable for the lives of its citizens, and thus should be taking responsibility by restricting the publication of such information.
Secondly, media censorship is also necessary so as to protect public morals against defamation, obscenity and blasphemy. Adequate media censorship would ensure that the people in Singapore, especially the youth, would be less exposed to such profanity and indecency. In a TIME magazine poll conducted on 20th March 2005, 53% of respondents said that they think broadcast-channel shows depicting sex and violence should be more strictly controlled, 68% believe that the entertainment industry has lost touch with viewers' moral standards, and 50% believe that there is too much sexual content on television today. From this, we can see that people do feel that the media today is threatening public morals. Also, on December 10th 2003, Fox failed to censor the F-word and the S-word during the Billboard Music Awards. The shocking thing is that there were over 2 million 2-17 year olds watching the awards. This comprised more than 20% of total viewers for the awards. As such, it is evident that adequate media censorship would enable the youth in Singapore to be less exposed to such profanity and indecency.
Lastly, the press should not go against the national agenda, but instead work for the progress of our country. In order to do so, media censorship is required to ensure that the material published to the public is accurate and in the best interests of our country, working towards what Singapore hopes to achieve as a nation. After all, one of the purposes of the press is to act as a communication tool between our government and our people, and therefore it is important that the press goes side-by-side with our national agenda, to ensure the people get the right impression of our government’s objectives and operations.
From what I have mentioned so far about the importance of media censorship, it may seem that we are biased towards the government, or pro-PAP, but I hope to dispel this incorrect notion that some of you here might have towards us. It is important to note that although we are subordinate to the government, we are an independent newspaper. As such, encouraging media censorship is from a rational and fair perspective and is in no way due to the influence from the government.
I sincerely hope that after listening to what I have mentioned so far, all of you here would understand the importance and necessity of media censorship in our country, and that media censorship must continue to be advocated in order for Singapore to progress.
Done by: Joel, Brian, Serena & Chelsia (09S06J)
What are the advantages & disadvantages of having a press that is uncritical of government policy?
There are several advantages and disadvantages of having a press that is uncritical of government policies. Being uncritical suggests that the press is not inclined to judge and impose its views and stands on the government policies made.
The advantages of having a press that is uncritical of government policy are as follows:
When the press is uncritical of the government policies of a country, it will present various perspectives on the government policies. The press will provide information that both supports and goes against the policies. Hence this can greatly benefit society since people can learn about the pros and cons of the policies from a wide spectrum of sources. From there, they can sieve out information that they deem important and relevant to themselves. In addition, with a comprehensive knowledge about the policies, people will not be shortchanged of information that is pertinent to their lives. With an uncritical press, they can also make well-informed and more objective choices regarding the government policies and choose a stand which they are comfortable with. Furthermore, this develops society’s maturity level since people have to filter out relevant information, and it also heightens their awareness of the different voices and extensive points of the view on a certain issue.
Secondly, an uncritical press can prevent false accusations of the government presenting biased information to society. It is possible that the press may over sensationalise certain news to create headlines. The press may be overly sarcastic or critical of the government so as to grab the attention of readers to increase readership and sales. As a result, the government can be put in an extremely unfair position, even having its reputation tarnished, while society can be deprived of relevant and objective information. Having an uncritical press can allow society to understand policies and issues more objectively without being influenced by biased and extremist viewpoints. Over the long run, an uncritical press can prevent political unrest and resentment of the government due to one-sided viewpoints presented by the press. An uncritical press can therefore promote social security and stability within a country.
As an uncritical press presents reports from many sources, the government can gather suggestions and ideas from various viewpoints. This can serve to help the government constantly improve its policies through feedback from the public. Opposing stands can become pressure for the government to better its policies. Thus, society can benefit from the overall positive changes to existing and new policies.
On the other hand, there are disadvantages to having an uncritical press:
An uncritical press will allow the inflow and publication of information from as many sources as possible, presenting an extensive range of perspectives. We need to be aware of groups of people in society who are not media literate. They may not be discerning of this information, and may not be equipped with skills to sieve out objective viewpoints. As a result, they may be easily influenced by the reports provided, or may even be overwhelmed with the large amount of information and cannot make well-informed choices.
In addition, a society needs to understand the reasons for the formulation of certain government policies to ensure a peaceful coexistence of the society and the government. An uncritical press cannot provide a comprehensive report on the rationale of a government policy and its advantages to society without presenting opposing viewpoints. As a result, it may become increasingly difficult for the government to gain support from society for the newly formulated policies.
The advantages of having a press that is uncritical of government policy are as follows:
When the press is uncritical of the government policies of a country, it will present various perspectives on the government policies. The press will provide information that both supports and goes against the policies. Hence this can greatly benefit society since people can learn about the pros and cons of the policies from a wide spectrum of sources. From there, they can sieve out information that they deem important and relevant to themselves. In addition, with a comprehensive knowledge about the policies, people will not be shortchanged of information that is pertinent to their lives. With an uncritical press, they can also make well-informed and more objective choices regarding the government policies and choose a stand which they are comfortable with. Furthermore, this develops society’s maturity level since people have to filter out relevant information, and it also heightens their awareness of the different voices and extensive points of the view on a certain issue.
Secondly, an uncritical press can prevent false accusations of the government presenting biased information to society. It is possible that the press may over sensationalise certain news to create headlines. The press may be overly sarcastic or critical of the government so as to grab the attention of readers to increase readership and sales. As a result, the government can be put in an extremely unfair position, even having its reputation tarnished, while society can be deprived of relevant and objective information. Having an uncritical press can allow society to understand policies and issues more objectively without being influenced by biased and extremist viewpoints. Over the long run, an uncritical press can prevent political unrest and resentment of the government due to one-sided viewpoints presented by the press. An uncritical press can therefore promote social security and stability within a country.
As an uncritical press presents reports from many sources, the government can gather suggestions and ideas from various viewpoints. This can serve to help the government constantly improve its policies through feedback from the public. Opposing stands can become pressure for the government to better its policies. Thus, society can benefit from the overall positive changes to existing and new policies.
On the other hand, there are disadvantages to having an uncritical press:
An uncritical press will allow the inflow and publication of information from as many sources as possible, presenting an extensive range of perspectives. We need to be aware of groups of people in society who are not media literate. They may not be discerning of this information, and may not be equipped with skills to sieve out objective viewpoints. As a result, they may be easily influenced by the reports provided, or may even be overwhelmed with the large amount of information and cannot make well-informed choices.
In addition, a society needs to understand the reasons for the formulation of certain government policies to ensure a peaceful coexistence of the society and the government. An uncritical press cannot provide a comprehensive report on the rationale of a government policy and its advantages to society without presenting opposing viewpoints. As a result, it may become increasingly difficult for the government to gain support from society for the newly formulated policies.
Cheong Li Min, Rachel Chin, Lim Shi Min, Sun Yi Yue, Tao Tao 09S03K
Friday, February 15, 2008
Public Forum on Freedom of the Press in Singapore - Hotseating avid blogger Xia Xue's perspective
Many areas of media censorship in
In a well-educated society like
In conclusion, I believe that media censorship should be abolished in
Weiliang, Ruisi, Bryan A., Serene from 09S06J
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Public Forum on Freedom of the Press in Singapore - Hotseating the perspective of a religious leader who is also the parent of young children
Media Censorship? Of Course! Violence and sex should never be portrayed by the media. It is a highly immoral act and a sin! Nowadays, TV programmes always show people killing each other, and many images are full of blood and gore! The 6th commandment states that “Thou shalt not kill”, featuring such images is encouraging others to sin. How can this be so? Also, such programmes often include women who are scantily dressed, and that is so wrong wrong wrong! Why let me tell you even the apostle Paul said that woman should cover up! Let me tell you why such images are bad and therefore should be highly censored or, better still, removed!
Firstly, religion states that we should never be involved in any acts of violence, and this includes coming into close contact with any form or portrayal of violence too. Just as it was now it is. Genesis 6:11 Now the earth was corrupt in God's sight and was full of violence. Psalm 11:5 The LORD examines the righteous, but the wicked [a] and those who love violence his soul hates. Let us repent… Hence, it is very important that we do not sin and that we look prim and proper, because this is an embodiment of being virtuous. Just look at Tuesday’s newspapers, religion has become merely an advertising gimmick! What “Looking good for jesus”, “Redeem yourself in his eyes!” on Tshirts. That is totally blasphemous. Such sensitive issues should be censored. This is one of the reasons why media censorship is essential.
Also, with the growth of media influences nowadays, Christians, especially kids and teenagers no longer place God as their first priority in life. Take my 2 kids for example, they would rather spend their time killing on another on the computer or watching the power rangers kill monsters on TV rather than read the bible! How sad.
Fellow parents out there, let me ask you this question. As a parent, wouldn’t you want your children to be protected from information which will pollute their innocent young minds? At such a tender age, these images and set of values which is completely, utterly, absolutely contradictory to what we teach them, and hope they will never ever become would do nothing but have detrimental effects on them! Children are very impressionable and such external forces (i.e. the media) might cause them to have violent tendencies. Proverbs 21:7 The violence of the wicked will drag them away, for they refuse to do what is right. Worst still, it might have a detrimental chain effect on their future. We as parents are responsible for the upbringing of our children; and I’m pretty sure many of you wouldn’t want your children to grow up with the wrong set of values.
Let us all be pro- media censorship! It is absolutely necessary to ensure that the generations to come do not live in a world filled of violence and sex. Do the right thing and support media censorship!
~
Bao Rong, Lionel, Michelle, Qian Sheng
09S06J
Firstly, religion states that we should never be involved in any acts of violence, and this includes coming into close contact with any form or portrayal of violence too. Just as it was now it is. Genesis 6:11 Now the earth was corrupt in God's sight and was full of violence. Psalm 11:5 The LORD examines the righteous, but the wicked [a] and those who love violence his soul hates. Let us repent… Hence, it is very important that we do not sin and that we look prim and proper, because this is an embodiment of being virtuous. Just look at Tuesday’s newspapers, religion has become merely an advertising gimmick! What “Looking good for jesus”, “Redeem yourself in his eyes!” on Tshirts. That is totally blasphemous. Such sensitive issues should be censored. This is one of the reasons why media censorship is essential.
Also, with the growth of media influences nowadays, Christians, especially kids and teenagers no longer place God as their first priority in life. Take my 2 kids for example, they would rather spend their time killing on another on the computer or watching the power rangers kill monsters on TV rather than read the bible! How sad.
Fellow parents out there, let me ask you this question. As a parent, wouldn’t you want your children to be protected from information which will pollute their innocent young minds? At such a tender age, these images and set of values which is completely, utterly, absolutely contradictory to what we teach them, and hope they will never ever become would do nothing but have detrimental effects on them! Children are very impressionable and such external forces (i.e. the media) might cause them to have violent tendencies. Proverbs 21:7 The violence of the wicked will drag them away, for they refuse to do what is right. Worst still, it might have a detrimental chain effect on their future. We as parents are responsible for the upbringing of our children; and I’m pretty sure many of you wouldn’t want your children to grow up with the wrong set of values.
Let us all be pro- media censorship! It is absolutely necessary to ensure that the generations to come do not live in a world filled of violence and sex. Do the right thing and support media censorship!
~
Bao Rong, Lionel, Michelle, Qian Sheng
09S06J
What are the advantages & disadvantages of having a press that is uncritical of government policy?
Please respond to this as a group, if you have chosen to comment on this question / strand.
Regards.
Regards.
Should schools punish students who post negative blogs about their teachers on the Internet?
Why or why not? To what extent should freedom of speech be allowed?
Please come up with a group response to this question.
Regards.
Please come up with a group response to this question.
Regards.
Sunday, February 3, 2008
We think that testimonial is the most widely used media tool.
We can practically see advertisements everywhere, on the streets, in magazines and newspapers as well as on television. A very popular example of testimonial advertising is Roger Federer for the brand Nike. Nike is just one of the many sports-related companies that create their identity and promote their products using famous sportsmen and sportswomen. Also, there are even companies that use celebrities (with no direct link to their products) in their advertisements, just like how the band S.H.E. promotes FreshLook contact lenses.
This method is especially used in advertisements when promoting a product with a famous brand name that is very appealing to the audience. For example, in the case of Brad Pitt being the spokesman for Tag Heuer, the company utilises the already-established popularity of Brad Pitt, making the audience think "if my Brad Pitt is using that Tag Heuer watch, I am going to have one too." The audience may also be subconsciously influenced into thinking that the product must be of high quality, so much so that such a famous celebrity is endorsing it.
Celebrities and their endorsements are interdependent. They simply complement each other on the path to riches and fame. In fact, the testimonial method is used very widely in Asian counties, where celebrities in Taiwan or Korea portray a cute nature while promoting products.
Done by Serena, Chelsia, Joel & Brian (09S06J)
We can practically see advertisements everywhere, on the streets, in magazines and newspapers as well as on television. A very popular example of testimonial advertising is Roger Federer for the brand Nike. Nike is just one of the many sports-related companies that create their identity and promote their products using famous sportsmen and sportswomen. Also, there are even companies that use celebrities (with no direct link to their products) in their advertisements, just like how the band S.H.E. promotes FreshLook contact lenses.
This method is especially used in advertisements when promoting a product with a famous brand name that is very appealing to the audience. For example, in the case of Brad Pitt being the spokesman for Tag Heuer, the company utilises the already-established popularity of Brad Pitt, making the audience think "if my Brad Pitt is using that Tag Heuer watch, I am going to have one too." The audience may also be subconsciously influenced into thinking that the product must be of high quality, so much so that such a famous celebrity is endorsing it.
Celebrities and their endorsements are interdependent. They simply complement each other on the path to riches and fame. In fact, the testimonial method is used very widely in Asian counties, where celebrities in Taiwan or Korea portray a cute nature while promoting products.
Done by Serena, Chelsia, Joel & Brian (09S06J)
Media Tools
Our Group beleives that the Testimonial method is the most effective method of persuasion.
To avoid mass repeat of information posted by previous groups, we'll just list down main points here.
Basically we feel that:
- Testimonial method appeals to the masses by means of famous celebrities. This will allow the company to tap in to/earn money from the big group of suprorters of that celebrity, as these supporters/fans will be more than willing to support their idols through practical actions of purchasing the products they "represent"
- Also, the testimonials/success stories of these celebrities add weight to the relibablity of the product, thus more people will be willing to trust in the product
- usage of this method means that the company is rich enough to hire these celebrities to sell their products. this adds on to the credibility of the company
In conclusion, the testimonial method is extremely effective because at the end of the day, it toys around with the emotions of the people, that is, more focus would go to the celebrity rather than the product (famous celebrity = good product) .
~
Bao Rong, Lionel, Michelle, Qian Sheng 09S06J
To avoid mass repeat of information posted by previous groups, we'll just list down main points here.
Basically we feel that:
- Testimonial method appeals to the masses by means of famous celebrities. This will allow the company to tap in to/earn money from the big group of suprorters of that celebrity, as these supporters/fans will be more than willing to support their idols through practical actions of purchasing the products they "represent"
- Also, the testimonials/success stories of these celebrities add weight to the relibablity of the product, thus more people will be willing to trust in the product
- usage of this method means that the company is rich enough to hire these celebrities to sell their products. this adds on to the credibility of the company
In conclusion, the testimonial method is extremely effective because at the end of the day, it toys around with the emotions of the people, that is, more focus would go to the celebrity rather than the product (famous celebrity = good product) .
~
Bao Rong, Lionel, Michelle, Qian Sheng 09S06J
Media Tools for Analysis
Our group believes that the two most widely-used techniques of persuasion are the testimonial method, as well as the bandwagon method.
The testimonial method is widely used in advertisements of slimming and beauty products, whereby advertisers hope to make use of the appeal of celebrities to attract women to purchase their beauty and/or slimming products. Examples of such advertisers include SK II products and Mary Chia Slimming Centre. When the audience see the success that the celebrities have in using the product, they are more or less assured that the product has a guarantee on it, and hence they would be more willing to use the product.
For the bandwagon method, advertisers such as Colgate and Sensodyne frequently claim their product to be the brand that most dentists are using. This method results in the target audience having a misconception that since many people are using the product, the product must be suitable for them as well. As such, they also start to use the product.
Between the two, we feel that the testimonial method would be more effective, compared to the bandwagon method, where dubious statistics are sometimes shown to try to catch the attention of audiences. Testimonials from celebrities on the other hand, show proof of success in the product, as well as being able to reach out to a wider group of people, due to the fact that they usually have a large group of fans that idolise them. Hence, these celebrity endorsements would probably be able to persuade more people when compared to the bandwagon, which usually relies on statistics to attract would-be consumers.
Done by Marvin, Xiaodi, Charmaine, Genevieve and Nicole 09S03K
The testimonial method is widely used in advertisements of slimming and beauty products, whereby advertisers hope to make use of the appeal of celebrities to attract women to purchase their beauty and/or slimming products. Examples of such advertisers include SK II products and Mary Chia Slimming Centre. When the audience see the success that the celebrities have in using the product, they are more or less assured that the product has a guarantee on it, and hence they would be more willing to use the product.
For the bandwagon method, advertisers such as Colgate and Sensodyne frequently claim their product to be the brand that most dentists are using. This method results in the target audience having a misconception that since many people are using the product, the product must be suitable for them as well. As such, they also start to use the product.
Between the two, we feel that the testimonial method would be more effective, compared to the bandwagon method, where dubious statistics are sometimes shown to try to catch the attention of audiences. Testimonials from celebrities on the other hand, show proof of success in the product, as well as being able to reach out to a wider group of people, due to the fact that they usually have a large group of fans that idolise them. Hence, these celebrity endorsements would probably be able to persuade more people when compared to the bandwagon, which usually relies on statistics to attract would-be consumers.
Done by Marvin, Xiaodi, Charmaine, Genevieve and Nicole 09S03K
Response to "Specific Media Tools for analysis"
Bandwagon is a widely used and effective technique of advertising. It appeals to the human nature of wanting to be included. The audience does not want to miss out on something that everyone seems to be doing, it wants to be with the crowd and not left behind. Besides, they believe that if everyone is doing it, it must be right/good for them, therefore they follow suit.
This is presicely how fads are started – “everybody’s doing it”. Thus by using the bandwagon technique, you can be sure that people will follow what the advertisers are marketing. An example is the recent Nike advert where you see people from all sporting activities wearing nike products. The message put across is something like “All sports people wear Nike so you have to, too.” Thus you will be coerced into wanting to buy the product.
Another effective technique would be the Testimonial method. The testimonial method is used to try and influence a prospective customer to buy the product when it has been praised by another impartial consumer, a professional or even a known and famous person whom the customer idolizes and may wish to emulate. After hearing the testimonials of these people, the customer tends to feel more secure and convinced that the product is suitable and useful to buy as the testimonials help to take away fear and uncertainty for the product. Testimonial method is often used for health products and it continues to remain the most effective method used for advertising health products. An example would be the Sensodyne toothpaste advertisement on television where a dentist will start talking about sensitive teeth and how Sensodyne toothpaste is the “#1 dentist recommended toothpaste for sensitive teeth”.
Repitition is also an effective tool. When an advert is repetitive, it somehow sticks to our mind. Repeating a certain symbol or brandname over a long period of time can leave an impression in our subconscious memories. The intensity of the repetition would determine how long the imprints last in our subconscious. Adverts that constantly exerts its meaning over us, in different ways, can leave a deeper impression on us that is not easily removed.
Also, when a certain advert is played again to us, memories of previous encounters with its brandname and symbols would almost instantly be recalled to our minds. Each time this happens, the brandname gets stronger. We might begin to link household products, lifestyles, cultures and behaviors to the product’s brandname. It will influence our perception of things.
One good example is Nike’s “Just do it”, which is advertised on every nike merchandise. The tick has become synonymous with the slogan “Just do it”, and has also become the symbol of trends, of being sporty, and of being with the flow. Anybody sporting a prominent tick, whether it originates from Nike or not, would be labeled as “sporty” or “trendy” in our subconscious, whether we realize it or accept it.
A uniquely Singaporean way of advertising would be the use of Singlish in advertisements. This helps to bring a sense of familiarity among Singaporeans. One example would be the product DoDo fishballs advertisement on television with the catchy phase “ Dodo fishballs! Shiok shiok!”.
There is another Singaporean strategy of marketing. Singaporeans respond to the words “SALE” and “discount” because of our notorious “kiasu” attitude, in that we are all rational consumers who like to make the best use of our limited resources in order to maximize satisfaction. :)
fangting, minjia, kim, bryan cai 09S03K
This is presicely how fads are started – “everybody’s doing it”. Thus by using the bandwagon technique, you can be sure that people will follow what the advertisers are marketing. An example is the recent Nike advert where you see people from all sporting activities wearing nike products. The message put across is something like “All sports people wear Nike so you have to, too.” Thus you will be coerced into wanting to buy the product.
Another effective technique would be the Testimonial method. The testimonial method is used to try and influence a prospective customer to buy the product when it has been praised by another impartial consumer, a professional or even a known and famous person whom the customer idolizes and may wish to emulate. After hearing the testimonials of these people, the customer tends to feel more secure and convinced that the product is suitable and useful to buy as the testimonials help to take away fear and uncertainty for the product. Testimonial method is often used for health products and it continues to remain the most effective method used for advertising health products. An example would be the Sensodyne toothpaste advertisement on television where a dentist will start talking about sensitive teeth and how Sensodyne toothpaste is the “#1 dentist recommended toothpaste for sensitive teeth”.
Repitition is also an effective tool. When an advert is repetitive, it somehow sticks to our mind. Repeating a certain symbol or brandname over a long period of time can leave an impression in our subconscious memories. The intensity of the repetition would determine how long the imprints last in our subconscious. Adverts that constantly exerts its meaning over us, in different ways, can leave a deeper impression on us that is not easily removed.
Also, when a certain advert is played again to us, memories of previous encounters with its brandname and symbols would almost instantly be recalled to our minds. Each time this happens, the brandname gets stronger. We might begin to link household products, lifestyles, cultures and behaviors to the product’s brandname. It will influence our perception of things.
One good example is Nike’s “Just do it”, which is advertised on every nike merchandise. The tick has become synonymous with the slogan “Just do it”, and has also become the symbol of trends, of being sporty, and of being with the flow. Anybody sporting a prominent tick, whether it originates from Nike or not, would be labeled as “sporty” or “trendy” in our subconscious, whether we realize it or accept it.
A uniquely Singaporean way of advertising would be the use of Singlish in advertisements. This helps to bring a sense of familiarity among Singaporeans. One example would be the product DoDo fishballs advertisement on television with the catchy phase “ Dodo fishballs! Shiok shiok!”.
There is another Singaporean strategy of marketing. Singaporeans respond to the words “SALE” and “discount” because of our notorious “kiasu” attitude, in that we are all rational consumers who like to make the best use of our limited resources in order to maximize satisfaction. :)
fangting, minjia, kim, bryan cai 09S03K
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)