PAP IBs - Misleading the Nation In fact, a study of the comments made by such online supporters of the PAP would reveal this mode of “engagement” by the PAP’s “voice in cyberspace” to be a regular practice – not only for a single post, but a pattern established through the account holder’s history. Posts tend to be overtly supportive of the PAP, its leaders and its policies, to the exclusion of everything else. Now, such views are not in any way wrong – we are all entitled to our own opinions. But it becomes an issue when such views are masquerading as the genuine sentiments of the ground, expressed repeatedly on public platforms, which gives the false impression that they are merely “to moderate the vitriol and balance the skewed comments” online. At times, the views expressed are also out of place, and seem little more than an attempt to seize every single opportunity to push a point in favour of the ruling party. There are no doubt accounts created by individuals who aggressively support opposition views or denounce the ruling party that bear the same mark as PAP IBs. However, clicking through to the profiles of these individuals would usually reveal that they are not used purely to post anti-establishment comments. There are also two other factors that suggest that a proper and organised – with the possibility of being paid or rewarded – IB for opposition parties does not exist. First, no opposition party leader had openly asked their members and supporters to fight on every (cyber)street corner. Second, a close scrutiny of the kind of co-ordinated attack on opposition parties that we see across online platforms hardly exists among those who go online to support opposition parties or express anger at the PAP. Although there are cases where this might appear to be so – such as the case of Roy Ngerng being sued by PM Lee – such efforts at defence pale in comparison to the efforts and coordination by supporters of the establishment. The net effect, then, is an online narrative that is heavily skewed towards the views of PAP IBs. IB online activism tend to revolve around instances where the political stakes are high, such as the reputation of the PM or a Minister, or for key government policies. Granted, this does not happen on every single piece of news or online content we see, but the bad thing is that it happens on issues that matter the most to the nation. There is also no telling when such activism will be ramped up. Perhaps nearer to the general elections? More importantly, given that the PAP has clearly voiced no qualms about their IBs hiding behind the vile of anonymity to swing public opinion in the party’s favour, the question to ask would be whether the PAP has actively sanctioned such activities, or is merely unaware of the effect that such activities have in social media. Ironically, for all the chest-thumping about anonymity online, the PAP Ministers and MPs purportedly behind the IBs have not made any form of protest against such activities or requested for them to “come clean”. Has the political leadership effectively lost control of what might have evolved to become an online splinter group of vigilantes fighting to defend the “truth” about how great Singapore leaders are in reality? Of course, they might be then excused for not taking to task a bunch of loose cannon they have no means of controlling. But for identifiable platforms that openly support the PAP, the establishment similarly did nothing. While Ministers and MPs criticise bloggers for “taking issues out of context” and misleading the public with information, the fact that pages like FAP and FLOP continue to operate in a manner which seeks to demean opposition members and its supporters through misleading headlines and quotes taken out of context, with no word from the PAP MPs, is a double standard by itself. A month or so back, FAP’s Jason Chua apologised to Abdul Salim Harun for posting an image of him with falsified information, in an attempt to discredit him. Abdul Salim Harun was tagged by a fake account, Jin Zheng (profile no longer accessible), which some suspect to be a pseudo account of Jason Chua himself. The apology came after Abdul Salim Harun made a police report against FAP for harassment. Let us also not forget who shared the photo of the CPF lady’s residence on their page, trying to lead public to think that the lady is not telling the whole truth. No MP spoke about this nor exclaimed their astonishment at the antics of such fanpages. To be fair, no one is stopping supporters of the PAP from expressing their views in public forums. Decisive and deliberate astro-turfing by IBs, on the other hand, prevents the public and policy makers alike from understanding ground sentiments. The PAP is actually not doing the government any favours by allowing this to happen. More importantly, members of the public need to be aware of the presence of such entities so that they would not be misled on issues and matters in Singapore. Being aware of the Internet Brigade would allow us to take a step back from their vitriol and focus on the social discussions that can help shape Singapore the way it should be.
Posted on: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 06:30:53 +0000