Government launches websites to bust online rumours

[theDoors]

http://www.straitstimes.com/breakin...aunches-websites-bust-online-rumours-20120922

By Rachel Chang

In a bid to cut through the swirl of rumour and distortion online, the Government has quietly launched a few "myth busting" initiatives. The first is a new section on its www.gov.sg website called "Factually". Since May, it has collected a series of primers on hot topics like the national reserves, certificates of entitlement and procurement processes.

They aim to give bite-sized answers to questions that have arisen over controversial decisions, such as the one in March to give $1.1 billion to bus operators to ramp up services. Taking things one step further, the Housing Board (HDB) two weeks ago started a new website known as HDB Speaks.

A first for government agencies here, its sole purpose is to address topics of controversy, like the affordability of resale HDB flats. One was recently been sold for more than $1 million.

Replete with bright graphics and written in a conversational style, it is a far cry from HDB's more sober main website, and aims to be a place where people can "get the facts on the myths about HDB" - its tagline. Both initiatives are works-in- progress, said the agencies in charge.

 

[bullfrog]

No need to start anymore new website. The PAPIB is alive and well in SBF. They only need to sharpen their saws in argument instead of doling out repetitive crap.

 

[seesuatah]

What is the point?

There is already enough propaganda on 154th

 

[Thick Face Black Heart]

What is the point?

There is already enough propaganda on 154th

The 154th has already been discredited. They need to devise more neutral sounding websites to lure unsuspecting people into believing that the bullshit they dish out is genuine.

Also, bloggers like Andrew Loh have been co-opted and this process is likely to continue.

 

[The Philistine]

The 154th has already been discredited. They need to devise more neutral sounding websites to lure unsuspecting people into believing that the bullshit they dish out is genuine.

Also, bloggers like Andrew Loh have been co-opted and this process is likely to continue.

They should also employ Xia lan Xue, She would add to their credibility.

 

[scroobal]

They have covered 13 articles across 7 topics ranging from Housing, Transport, Inflation, Procurement, Debt Level, GST to Flooding. No revelation or even anything that corrects what most of us know.

I then wonder who they are referring to when it comes to myths, inaccuracies etc.

Online commentaries that disagree with the government are based on views, opinions and sometimes research that dispute the Govt's foundation of a policy, the way that it is applied and the supposed beneficiaries of these policies. These are not myths, these are genuine challenges which the govt avoids or do they deem these as myths.

Maybe instead of having the website writing and putting out articles in isolation and on the basis of treating challenging comments as myths, they should create a non de plume such as "Mr Fact" who can be any of the usual moutpieces such as the SPH sisters, Janadas Devan etc who can take turns using this moniker to address allegations or "myths" by actually referring to the myth, which blog or website it appeared in, date etc and address them directly.

For example - if the SDP website suggests that the Singapore Govt panders to the generals of Myanmar on Monday, then by Wed, one would like Janada Devan to use the Moniker "Mr Fact" to reply that it is not true and make factual statements such as that their records show that no govt officials have met them, they are not allowed to enter the country, their families and children are not living or studying in Singapore, there are no joint ventures with anyone connected with the generals.

Eventually "Mr Fact" can build the govt's credibility.

All 13 articles do not address the concerns and the issues raised by citizens. We agree on what the policy is on the website but not its construct, it application or who the intended beneficiaries are. For instance, the issue with funding private companies ( Billion dollar buses) owned by Temasek who are supposed to follow commercial principles (these actually appear on the Factually website) to pay for buses remains contentious. The issues raised are valid. This will for instance benefit Ho Ching as the head of Temasek as their balance sheet will certainly look good.

 

[Bigfuck]

If you hire cocksuckers the only myth they will dispel is the myth that PAP knows anything at all. LHL, save yourself by eliminating 80% of your management team. By any first class appraisal they only qualify at the bottom 20 percent.

 

[zeddy]

PAP should put someone in charge to dispel rumours in the Internet that the PM is a bloody Bapok..

 

[oppoibchief]

and Ho ching is not a man...

 

[kingrant]

I think that the PAP faces a conundrum. If it begins to address every blogger, it will be seen to be on the defensive. In cases like SDP and the RP, the PAP would be loath to have to answer some of its claims, and appear to dignify a party led by dishonest bankrupts.

If I am the govt, I wont be able to govern if I have to chase down every lie, rumour or challenge. Which also bogs down the propaganda machinery. Esp now that using defamation suits is not publicly well accepted.

If it does not, voters can see that the PAP doesnt want to acknowledge the elephant in the room, which can lead to another GE 2011 ignominy.

So what they do is just to plod on, continue to dominate the bully pulpits, blow its trumpets louder, cast red herrings and smoke screens, and exploit the element of fear and unknown. I daresay the govt is fighting a rearguard battle, which is becoming a losing one day by day.

They have covered 13 articles across 7 topics ranging from Housing, Transport, Inflation, Procurement, Debt Level, GST to Flooding. No revelation or even anything that corrects what most of us know.

I then wonder who they are referring to when it comes to myths, inaccuracies etc.

Online commentaries that disagree with the government are based on views, opinions and sometimes research that dispute the Govt's foundation of a policy, the way that it is applied and the supposed beneficiaries of these policies. These are not myths, these are genuine challenges which the govt avoids or do they deem these as myths.

Maybe instead of having the website writing and putting out articles in isolation and on the basis of treating challenging comments as myths, they should create a non de plume such as "Mr Fact" who can be any of the usual moutpieces such as the SPH sisters, Janadas Devan etc who can take turns using this moniker to address allegations or "myths" by actually referring to the myth, which blog or website it appeared in, date etc and address them directly.

For example - if the SDP website suggests that the Singapore Govt panders to the generals of Myanmar on Monday, then by Wed, one would like Janada Devan to use the Moniker "Mr Fact" to reply that it is not true and make factual statements such as that their records show that no govt officials have met them, they are not allowed to enter the country, their families and children are not living or studying in Singapore, there are no joint ventures with anyone connected with the generals.

Eventually "Mr Fact" can build the govt's credibility.

All 13 articles do not address the concerns and the issues raised by citizens. We agree on what the policy is on the website but not its construct, it application or who the intended beneficiaries are. For instance, the issue with funding private companies ( Billion dollar buses) owned by Temasek who are supposed to follow commercial principles (these actually appear on the Factually website) to pay for buses remains contentious. The issues raised are valid. This will for instance benefit Ho Ching as the head of Temasek as their balance sheet will certainly look good.

 

[Bigfuck]

I think that the PAP faces a conundrum. If it begins to address every blogger, it will be seen to be on the defensive. In cases like SDP and the RP, the PAP would be loath to have to answer some of its claims, and appear to dignify a party led by dishonest bankrupts.
....

Look at SBF you will see how cocksuckers from PAP are in here. I am very relaxed as the degree of the discontent has grown in numbers and intensity far beyond the establishment with their rich dinners can fathom.

 

[sleaguepunter]

how does cutting an article from cna or shitty times and reproduce the whole article here by say, kanina, make netizens believe the BS?

 

[scroobal]

I agree that addressing each blogger is not the answer but addressing at least the top 5 "myths" circulating would be good start. But I agree that it is indeed a rearguard action which they are losing.

Looks like a battle of the hearts and minds.

I think that the PAP faces a conundrum. If it begins to address every blogger, it will be seen to be on the defensive. In cases like SDP and the RP, the PAP would be loath to have to answer some of its claims, and appear to dignify a party led by dishonest bankrupts.

So what they do is just to plod on, continue to dominate the bully pulpits, blow its trumpets louder, cast red herrings and smoke screens, and exploit the element of fear and unknown. I daresay the govt is fighting a rearguard battle, which is becoming a losing one day by day.

 

[winnipegjets]

Guess the Straits Times is not doing a good job. With newspapers, TV and radio telling the same stories with little impact, how is this online initiative going to make any difference? Dah!

 

[lee6100]

I think that the PAP faces a conundrum. If it begins to address every blogger, it will be seen to be on the defensive. In cases like SDP and the RP, the PAP would be loath to have to answer some of its claims, and appear to dignify a party led by dishonest bankrupts.

If I am the govt, I wont be able to govern if I have to chase down every lie, rumour or challenge. Which also bogs down the propaganda machinery. Esp now that using defamation suits is not publicly well accepted.

If it does not, voters can see that the PAP doesnt want to acknowledge the elephant in the room, which can lead to another GE 2011 ignominy.

So what they do is just to plod on, continue to dominate the bully pulpits, blow its trumpets louder, cast red herrings and smoke screens, and exploit the element of fear and unknown. I daresay the govt is fighting a rearguard battle, which is becoming a losing one day by day.

They are afflicted with subliminal arrogance - they have scholarships, go to the best universities, have the best brains, therefore they have all the answers and that everything out here in cyperspace is rubbish because we are not of the same ilk. If only they make the effort to trawl, there are gems of solutions offered to our current problems. It requires a huge 180-degree change in their mindset to accept that some of the things they are doing are wrong. But with the scholarship system breeding a huge Yes-Man government, we can't see them doing that, can we? After all, they are the best and they are always right, aren't they?

All of us here putting our two cents' worth want Singapore to do well. By refusing to work with differing views and dissenting opinions, the government is losing an important avenue of ideas. Run mostly by technocrats and engineer types, they understand numbers very well but are failures in understanding social issues. Come 2016, when the numbers again show them slipping, all the sorries and apologies will not work anymore. The more they keep a lid on the pressure cooker, the worse it gets. As Bill Clinton once said, "A strong grip means a weak hand."

 

[eatshitndie]

.....and that everything out here in cyperspace is rubbish because we are not of the same ilk. If only they make the effort to trawl, there are gems of solutions offered to our current problems.

don't under-estimate the pmo and some pro-pap civil servants who work there. they do trawl for ideas and corrective suggestions from alternate means, including face to face dialogues with ex sinkie talents abroad and feedback online. the credence they place on the feedback depends on the source and legitimacy and credentials of individuals providing constructive inputs. operative word is "constructive".

 

[Kohliantye]

Looks like a battle of the hearts and minds.

..........................And a reluctant admission that www.reach.gov.sg is a complete failure...

I don't understand why ministers, mp's and other leaders dare not reply to queries and claims that appear in reach.gov.sg???

Is it because their English is bad or that they may be lacking in proper information or could it simply be a "couldn't care the less" attitude as salary and directorships are many and high and hence no time for replies.

 

[winnipegjets]

If there are more factoids put out - deemed as 'rumours' by the PAP government - these PAP propagandists will be very busy.

1. The government subsidy for HDB flat is a myth. The government inflates the price of HDB flats in the resale market to push up the price of new HDB flats. New HDB flats are made even more expensive by the fact that the government inflates the cost of land;
2. The PAP government is close to depleting the country's reserves with poor investments in the last decade;
3. The PAP government has agreed to make Sinkapore a part of China by 2030. The first step is to allow more PRC nationals to establish themselves in Sinkapore;

 

[lee6100]

don't under-estimate the pmo and some pro-pap civil servants who work there. they do trawl for ideas and corrective suggestions from alternate means, including face to face dialogues with ex sinkie talents abroad and feedback online. the credence they place on the feedback depends on the source and legitimacy and credentials of individuals providing constructive inputs. operative word is "constructive".

Good point.