From contempt of court to fake news: public legitimisation and governance in mediated Singapore

Abstract

Common perceptions and literature on media in Singapore suggest an authoritarian government that either silences or co-opts public media, using repressive laws that are passed unopposed, given the People’s Action Party (PAP) government’s super majority in Parliament. In practice, laws in Singapore are not simply crafted to maximise their effects in silencing political criticism but are also carefully debated – at times with the PAP’s strongest opponents – in public, to rationalise their implementation even before such laws are applied. In studying public discourse surrounding four recent pieces of media legislation, this article argues that the Singapore government strives not just for its right to pass laws at will but is equally concerned with building its legitimacy to govern using these laws. This sophisticated practice, in line with Foucault’s concept of governmentality, seeks to govern by convincing the citizenry to consent the suppression of their own socio-cultural and political freedom.

Cognitive Barriers to COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake Among Older Adults

“…Previous research has suggested that targeted messaging and intervention may be more effective when introduced through a family doctor ( 54 ), grassroots volunteers from the community using a multi-component approach [i.e., home visits, telephone and leaflets reminders; ( 71 , 72 )], and through traditional media such as television and newspapers ( 73 ). Further, as older adults may be more susceptible to misinformation ( 74 , 75 ), establishing that messages through said channels are verified—whether through government ( 76 ) or journalist intervention ( 77 )—and education on digital literacy ( 78 , 79 ) may serve as potential counters.…”

COVID-19 apps in Singapore and Australia: reimagining healthy nations with digital technology

“…For the most part, this is due to the structure and dynamics of Singaporean society, and its political arrangements, public policy traditions and strong systems of social control and clear support for or alternatively discouragement and sanctioning of different kinds of expression and voicessomething well established in the scholarly literature (Chua, 2017;George, 2000George, , 2017Lee, 2010Lee, , 2014, especially via various studies published in Media International Australia (most recently, Lee and Lee, 2019). In recent years, the Singapore government, following the dampened level of votes received by governing People's Action Party (PAP), that has ruled since the 1967, in the 2011 Election, and a more sceptical populace (Barr, 2016;Zhang, 2016), it has sought to extend consultation and formal 'listening' mechanisms to provide additional opportunities for citizens' voices.…”

Singapore’s national discourse on foreign domestic workers: Exploring perceptions of the margins

“…Mcnair (2017) coined ‘media management’ as a way in which the state operates, shapes, and pressures media organizations to align with the government’s political perspectives. Co-optive practices of the media refer to the ways authoritarian states co-opt public media institutions by adopting a variety of strategies (legal, political, and social) to retain political stronghold (Lee and Lee, 2019). This may not always entail the use of repressive laws, but through sophistry in governmentality by ‘convincing the citizenry to consent the suppression of their own socio-cultural and political freedom’ (Lee and Lee, 2019: 1).…”