![]() What this implies is that the falsehood is so dangerous and malignant for the public discourse, potentially inciting violence and harm, that it has to be dealt with speedily – hence the inclusion of POFMA in the Government’s armoury. POFMA was framed by the Government as a piece of legislation that would address the virality and damage online falsehoods could cause, with the offending falsehood addressed with a correction or removal within “a matter of hours”. The first issue I want to address is that of speed. The Need for Speed: How POFMA was justified Far from being used a shield to protect society from online falsehoods, it can also be used as a sword, addressing low-level one-off misleading comments that do not pass the threshold of how POFMA was justified by some PAP MPs – to deal with riots, people dying on the streets etc. It is the position of the Workers’ Party that the problem with POFMA as it stands, is that it gives far too much power in the elected Government of the day to use it for collateral purposes. Our position was that court procedures could be modified to address the Government’s main criticism against our proposal – the need for a speedy response. ![]() It is the Workers’ Party case when the Bill was debated in Parliament in May last year that a neutral body like the Courts was better placed in our Westminster system of government – one that separates the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary – to adjudicate on fake news. I look forward to listening to and addressing questions and criticisms from faculty and the student body on my speech later. Therefore, the use of POFMA and the reasons behind its application will continue to be closely scrutinized by the public. ![]() This is particularly important since the Government has announced that it will not deal with all online falsehoods. I will also explore how the pretext of a misleading statement which may not be false, and separately claiming to act in the “public interest” can be easily abused by a vindictive and politically motivated Minister.įinally I will speak of the multi-pronged response to online falsehoods and what other options the Government can employ to address to falsehoods without resorting to POFMA. Second, I will deal with the matter of falsehoods and the “public interest” as defined by POFMA. First, I will assess whether the POFMA directions issued so far correspond to the Government’s justification that POFMA was needed as a speedy response to viral and malicious online falsehoods. My opening remarks will cover three main issues. Since then, we have seen the law employed against opposition party members and Government critics. The Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act or POFMA was debated in Parliament in May last year and became law in October. ![]() Thank you for your kind invitation to share my thoughts and to engage with the student body on the matter of Fake News. Secretary-General, Workers’ Party of Singaporeĭistinguished faculty of NTU, Mr Mohd Ismail Yaacob – Chairperson, Public Policy and Global Affairs Club and students of NTU. NTU Public Policy and Global Affairs Club: Fake News Forum
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |