For advertisement

Sample

2/20/2012

Treading on dangerous water

The opening up of cyberspace and social media has given the critics a lot of room to air their grievances. Everything seems to be fair game for the commentators and policy makers would no longer be able to whitewash poorly crafted policies that adversely affect the people. Life has never been that good before until internet came to the scene. It used to be one way but not any more.

I must admit that attacking and questioning a policy is easy. Every policy, no matter how well conceived, would have flaws or would be good to some and bad to others. Some are more bad than good. The housing policy has been whipped and thrashed for quite sometime and will continue to be the angst of the people. But it has done a lot of good in increasing the paper value of property owners and none will be complaining about it. It also has severe consequences on those who come late and could not keep up with the runaway prices. The young and future generations will bear the full brunt of this bad policy.

It is right and proper to want to dismiss this policy for good and modify it to a more well balanced one to be kinder to the young as well. Putting on the pressure for change, kpkb, etc is fine. But the critics have to be careful not to end up attacking the policy maker and ended up with defamation suits.

Shanmugam has sent in his lawyers. Hsien Loong is also taking TRE to task. And the issues or complaints were defamation. They have their rights to clear their names from any accusations or allegations. And being where they are, they have more rights than others for sure. You can’t expect the country’s top leaders to be the same as the man in the street. Even celebrities have bigger rights by virtue of their income and public image which are important to their earning abilities.

So far the lighter touch policy is appearing to be intact with both parties asking for the removal of the offending articles and an apology. Let’s hope that in these cases, sorry is enough and no further action be taken, no cost and damages be lined up after sorry is said.

A reminder to all, criticize for all you want. Attacking and accusing someone for wrongdoings would require proof and the will and resources to go further in the courts of law when challenged.

10 comments:

Matilah_Singapura said...

I predict that after this messy business, there will be "controls" imposed on internet activity, and these new laws will trample all over free speech and expression.

Anonymous said...

A smarter citizenry
will result in a more
ingenious leadership.

It bodes well for Sin.

patriot

Anonymous said...

Counter to your views.
Taiwan's Makiya case - the status of celebrity is a liability after all.

Anonymous said...

Back to square one, shall we say : "it was good while it lasted"....

Anonymous said...

Here’s my favorite quote ;-

“In a truly transparent world a liar will always be outed as a liar anyway. And if everyone felt secure speaking freely, the whole world would change.”

Alas, so much talk by the khaw pei khaw bu miw on 'no difference between political & private life' is only good for 5 mins. All that transparency and accountability still does not apply to the privilege PAP.

If you can't stand the heat, get out of kitchen.
Yet these men demand highest possible salary for their 'unchallenged talent' and demand protection of their 'unchallenged integrity, reputation, honesty' with unlimited apparatus like msm and defamation suits..

Same playbook. lawyers' letters to chill the freedom of expression. you bet! they can stop all the Transparency and Accountability hypocrisies now. This two tactics are soooooo transparent for all to see.

Moral story of the day - there's still reasons for internet anonymity.

Anonymous said...

Hehe....

wont be surprised if netizens send lawyer letter to each other.
And blogger suing commenter and vice-versa.

patriot

Anonymous said...

In this day and age, how many actually believe everything that they read or hear? Sue only when the rumor gains traction or gathers storm.

The good thing about freer speech is that it may draw people to join in the discussion thus creating greater political awareness.

Anonymous said...

I wonder who is paying for all these lawyers' letters?

I certainly hope no tax payers' money is used.

Anonymous said...

Total accountability and total transparency are required for the government. The legal means is now not the solution in internet age. Why can't the government be transparent to prove their own view instead of bullying others? If the government is not totally transparent, why would the people need to trust them in the first place? Are they saint or God?

The keys are total accountability and total transparency. Can this government do these? Obviously, they have not. So, why the legal cases?

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

More legal letters more business for the lawyers.