Why Singapore Media Companies Need To Be On The Social TV Train?

TV, as we know it, has not really changed much or has it?

I remember the days of the black and white TV in the 1960’s. Then came colour TV and that caused quite a stir in the 1970s. But generally what TV did was to provide entertainment to families and friends at home. What that entailed was getting your family members together infront of the TV as you watch a show. It was a social event, a gathering of people and family in front of a screen that became the window to the larger world outside our own homes. We laughed and cried as we witnessed stories unfold before us and we discussed the story plots and the issues that these stories raised after watching TV.

When the Internet arrived and people started spending more time watching their computer screens, TV audiences started to decline. This decline seemed to accelerate when mobile phones and tablets came into the scene and people started to question whether TV as a entertainment medium could survive.

Social media was the real game changer. Networking websites like Facebook and Twitter began to rule cyberspace and younger people (especially those in the 15- 35 years of age), began to spend even more time on the Internet, “speaking” to their friends about everything and anything and updating your status on Facebook became part of their daily routine. Singaporeans on average spend about 25 hours a week online, thanks to our well-connected island-wide broadband infrastructure.

This same group of people, termed as “millennials” by advertisers and media executives, are also watching less and less TV.

[“Millennials” — defined by the North American industry as the generation comprised of 15- to 34 year-olds — comprise more than 1.7 billion consumers worldwide and represent the largest demographic bubble in both U.S. and Canadian history. Millennials constitute over 85 million in the U.S., – and in Canada, there are nearly 10 million millennials — more than 30 percent of the country’s current population. Check out –  Disney/ABC Television, Corus Entertainment to Create Millennial Channel – ABC News.]

I personally got this sense as well, when I ask my students in class, if they watched a certain TV show or if they watched the news on TV, and often the answer I got was a shake of the head. Ms Grace Fu, Senior Minister of State for Information, Communication and the Arts, revealed in parliament that the daily reach of free-to-air (FTA) channels has declined significantly between 2005 and 2011, from 92 per cent to 75 per cent. The stress and consternation among TV executives must now be almost palpable.

What then is the future of TV and more importantly, the future of PSB (public service broadcast) programmes on FTA channels like Channel 5, Channel 8 and okto?

A PSB Review Panel completed its study on how to enhance the provision of PSB content and its recommendations were discussed in parliament recently.

Among its recommendations:

1) That resources be made available for story-planning, scripting and research and to ensure sufficient time for filming and post-production. In short, enhancing the key parts of the production process.

2) Encourage the development of programme pilots to test audience reception and determine which ideas and concepts sell and which bomb out, thus giving more clarity on the ones that can be developed into full programmes.

3) That the MDA identify public- and private-sector partners to nurture local talents through sustained training, attachment and talent-matching plans.

4) That PSB content be made more widely available to audiences on both FTA and non-FTA platforms like online media websites like MediaCorp’s xinmsn, SPH’s RazorTV and pay-TV platforms like StarHub TV and Singtel’s mioTV.

Discussions on the latter have been numerous with varying levels of depth but essentially its what is termed by MediaCorp as 360TV, making content available on all platforms.

The idea is also simple in theory but may face bottlenecks in practice as it raises a lot of questions. How should these PSB programmes, first broadcast on FTA channels, be distributed to other platforms, especially those not owned by MediaCorp? At what cost should they be made available? (or should it be free?). How do the different media platform owners share the revenue derived from the airing of these programmes?

But what is also interesting in this discussion is that which was not touched on or perhaps not given as much attention as it deserves. It’s what people are doing in their everyday lives on social media which has crept inevitably, into TV viewership, helped along by the technology. The era of social TV fuelled by the advent of Smart TVs has arrived. These are TVs carrying internet streaming capabilities which allow you to surf the net, check your email and Facebook accounts and watch TV at the same time.

What does social TV allow you to do? Well it allows you to personalise your TV guide, link up with Facebook and Twitter and see which of your friends are actually watching the programme, follow what fans say about a programme or follow the stars on Twitter, switch to a live chat platform and speak to fellow fans and make new friends, see photos of your favourite TV stars, take part in a poll concerning a certain episode of a programme. All this interactivity is further enhanced by the provision of a dashboard menu on the screen which makes it easier for you to do what you want to do on your TV screen by clicking on respective activity thumbnails.

This is what is currently available on the social TV services space around the world and Google and Apple have already jumped on the bandwagon. However, MediaCorp has some ways to go yet in terms of developing its resources to enable truly social TV offerings. Currently the social aspects of TV viewing like Twittering and checking out Facebook TV events are pretty much confined  and contained within a specific programme’s online space. There is no integrated platform where customization is offered to the TV viewer, where he can create his own “favorites” menu of channels and programmes and do all the social stuff I was talking about earlier. [Also read: CNA goes 24 hours with new city studio – TODAYonline 19 Jan 2013]

Take for example First XI, a Channel 5 reality series where a squad of footballers is selected after some auditions to undergo 3 months of grueling training, tough challenges, competitive matches and overseas stints, under the laser sharp supervision and tutelage of Liverpool legend Steve McMahon, and ex-national player R.Sasikumar.

While you can keep up to date with the series on xinmsn’s Catch-up TV (First XI: Episode 1 on MSN Video) and follow some of the reality stars on Twitter, there’s really very little space for TV fans to talk and share their comments. While xinmsn (MediaCorp’s video site in collaboration with Microsoft) maybe the most convenient platform to be developed into a full-fledged social TV service offering, it may probably be best if MediaCorp actually think seriously about starting this service afresh on a totally new platform. This will ensure that the shortfalls and limitations of the xinmsn website does not hinder the full range of services that can be made available on a full-fledged social TV platform.

This social TV platform and all it’s interactive features can be made available to viewers as an add-on service for a price, perhaps in the form of a modest monthly subscription. When this new platform is fully developed and running, it can then form joint ventures and collaborations with production companies and distributors to develop and market new content, making for a more vibrant and exciting TV market.

This is already happening around the world. Take, for example, UK media mogul, Simon Fuller and his production company, XIX Entertainment  (creator of the ‘Pop Idol’ franchise). Fuller signed a partnership with social TV platform, yap.TV, to incorporate the new TV show format called ‘¡Q’VIVA’ seamlessly from first broadcast on TV to the second screen (eg. mobile phones and tablets) using yap.TV’s Live Pulse audio synchronisation technology.

There are a couple of other reasons why MediaCorp should launch its own social TV platform.

Firstly, stickiness, one of the most prevalent characteristics that is common to all great brands in the world. Facebook enhanced it through its interactive features, Apple has it through it’s simple and user-friendly designs. Stickiness ensures a loyal customer base. This is what MediaCorp’s social TV platform can potentially help to achieve for it’s FTA channels.

Secondly ratings! And following on its heels, ad revenue, the life blood of FTA channels which form the bulk of MediaCorp’s array of broadcast service offerings.

Live tweeting about a show you are watching is perhaps one leading indicator of how social media could be driving programme ratings. According to Tony Wang, General Manager of Twitter UK, the UEFA Champions League football tournament hit 63,000 tweets per second at its highest point last year.

During the 2011 Video Music Awards, Beyoncé’s announcement that she was pregnant generated over 80,000 tweets per second (as discussed in more detail by Kristin Frank here, demonstrating the spontaneous and artful approaches).

What’s really interesting is Twitter’s OxygenLive experiment carried out in the US recently. (OxygenLive is described as a “social viewing party” with talent from the show, pulling comments and conversation from several networks, including Twitter, into a central hub).

The experiment found a 109% boost in engagement by East Coast US viewers when the OxygenLive platform was included. Similarly, Twitter claims that during the CBS show ‘Survivor’, there was a 400% increase in tweets around the show from 2010 to 2011 as a result of live tweeting by talent involved in the programme (source: IPTV News).

Therefore, dare I say, social media and the Internet have not sounded the death knell of TV, contrary to growing beliefs, but in fact, given it a much needed boost, even a lifeline.

And as Tony Wang so aptly put it, “Social TV is based upon a fundamental human impulse – as you enjoy something, it has to be shared…With TV, it just so happens that it is encapsulated perfectly in a tweet. Social TV is not something that a broadcaster decides to have, it is something that is here and now.”

TV viewing has indeed come a long way since the days of the bulky old black and white boxes in the 1960’s. But it remains a social experience just as when it first brightened up the family living rooms many years ago, only this time it is several notches higher in richness. TV executives, do I hear a sigh of relief?

Visualizing Audience Data – Making Sense of Social Media Chat

As the saying goes, “A picture paints a thousand words”. This slogan underpins the growth of the data analytics and visualization sector. Central to why there is a tremendous interest in this area of research is the fact that human beings are a very visual species. We receive and process data largely through our visual sense. So it is not surprising that we are more drawn to any application that allows us to make sense of complex data in a visual manner.

Science and technology has progressed so much that scientists and researchers are now able to do metadata-mining i.e. extract and map data from social networking sites to a very high degree of depth and accuracy. Data analytics and visualization tools are then used to present these data in creative and interesting ways which may uncover surprising stories about how we learn, how we interact with each other, how we consume products and services and why we consume them in the way we do.

This has great implications for nearly every industry and probably more so for the media industry especially since the advent of the Internet has accelerated digital media convergence of the TV, radio film and  publishing platforms.

One of the many areas within the media industry that is probably poised for change is the area of media metrics or how we track and measure audiences of various media products whether it is a TV show, film, radio programme or publication.

There’s no denying that social media is irreversibly changing the way media executives are measuring audiences because it is not sufficient anymore to look at statistical metrics of your audience and their demographics. Social media allows media executives to learn more about their audience, the conversations that they are having with each other, the tone of these conversations and the emotions they carry with them. All these can be tracked by technology.

Take the latest phenomenon to hit British shores, called “chatterboxing”. This refers to people discussing TV shows on social media sites via their smart phones or tablets.

An industry report revealed that one in four UK viewers (26%) and 2 out of 5 (44%) of those under 35 years of age are commenting to others about a TV show they have been watching, either online or via SMS.

Currently the technology exists to be able to track these conversations and analyse them according to whatever variable that is important to the media owner, for example geographic locations, age groups, occupations, so on and so forth.

This is spectacularly shown in a TED talk presentation done by MIT researcher, Deb Roy, when he showed how he used the immense amount of data he acquired after wiring up his house with video cameras to discover how his new born baby boy learnt to speak, specifically, to say “water”.

But how does this relate to media metrics and audience measurement, you may ask?

Well, later in his presentation, he speaks about how this technology can be used to scan the social media space to track and collect data on conversations about media products (TV programmes) and consumer feelings about these products. (fast forward to 11:30 min)

It will be fantastic if Singapore media owners adopt this new technology to better understand what their audiences want so that they can meet these demands. But better still, media owners will be able to present information that is more potent, more efficacious, to advertisers.

Just think about it. Now all we know about someone who watches a TV show is that s/he is of a certain demographic and that s/he may own a car or that s/he earns a certain salary a month. As opposed to in the future (which is now really), we would be able to know what s/he thought about the show, how many people felt the same way about the show, how many want to see a second season of the show, etc. The information is deeper and richer and definitely more valuable to all parties.

These are exciting times indeed! Social media. What started as a simple tool to connect with people for social purposes is now starting to form the basis for getting accurate information about how media products are consumed and even understand why they are in demand. And this is just the beginning.

Racial Faux Pas Ignite Social Media Chatter

Being a sports fan I am intrigued when I read about racism in sport especially when I think about how the sport in itself would not be where it is today without the participation and the contribution of its coloured (read: non-white) stars.

History is replete with coloured athletes who crossed the racial barrier and went on to be truly international stars. Boxing’s self-proclaimed “The Greatest” Muhammed Ali is one and the 4-gold  hero, Jesse Owens, who set the 1936 Olympics alight, is another.

And as racial barriers came down, we saw ethnic African sportsmen and women make their mark in almost every other sport in the world. Soccer, arguably the world’s most popular sport, has its fair share of coloured footballers who have excelled in the biggest stage of all, the World Cup – Brazil’s Pele and Portugal’s Eusebio come to mind. They brought great joy to all who love the sport. Football brings people together and just for those 90 minutes, people set aside their petty differences and raise their voices so that their stars, irrespective of the colour of their skins, can raise their game to bring glory for their respective clubs and/or nation.

So I was understandably disappointed when I saw on TV what happened at the start of the Manchester United – Liverpool game at Old Trafford (Man U’s home ground) a couple of weeks ago. In the customary handshake ceremony before the start of the game, Liverpool’s Luis Suarez refused to shake the hands of Man U’s Patrice Evra, as he was still smarting from the 8-match ban he received after he racially abused Patrice in an earlier match last October.

Then recent reports emerged that Manchester City’s striker Balotelli was taunted by monkey chants when City played against Portugal’s FC Porto in a Europa league match. Balotelli’s team-mate, Micah Richards, said he reluctantly closed his Twitter account because he could not stand the abuse he was receiving on it.

All is not well with English football when England captain, John Terry, was stripped of his captaincy because of allegations of racially abusing QPR defender, Anton Ferdinand. But the one that really enraged me is the racist tweet by a soccer fan who witnessed the shocking and dramatic scenes on the pitch as paramedics tried to revive footballer, Fabrice Muamba, who suffered a heart attack and was literally fighting for his life.

I began to wonder – what is wrong with our world? Sport is the one arena that racism has found it extremely difficult to rear its ugly head, or was that wishful thinking on my part?

And just when I thought the glowing ambers of racism as reported in the media were dying out, the fires were ignited again closer to home. A netizen came across some pictures of UOB employees dressed in traditional Indian garb who painted their faces black and posted their photos on Facebook. She then informed the mainstream media about the photos, expressing her disappointment with the lack of sensitivity and propriety on the part of the UOB employees who, in their defence (weak as it maybe), were simply trying to have fun at their Bollywood-themed staff dinner.

Some bloggers felt that Singaporeans were just raising a hue and cry over nothing. One blogger from popular citizen journalism site, even implored Singaporeans to “Lighten up…get a date and get laid.”

Sorry, I beg to differ.

While context is important in understanding the true intentions of parties in any controversy, it cannot be presented as an excuse to explain away the actions of those who are culpable, like what the blogger in the site tried to do.

The blogger cited Robert Downey Jr in Tropic Thunder as an example of an entertainer who appropriates someone else’s ethnic identity for laughter and says that its done all the time.

He also cited stand-up comedians Russell Peters and our own Kumar (both of whom happen to be of Indian ethnicity) as examples of people who frequently breach racial taboos in their stand up routines while not receiving any complaints from their audience. BUT even Russell Peters refers to Indians as the “brown” people. You see he understands racial nuances and that the world is made up of all types of people of different colours- white, red, yellow, brown and yes…black.

But people who go to watch such entertainment know what they are in for. That’s CONTEXT for you! They are prepared for the racial digs that they know will come their way thick and fast. And people who are not into that brand of humour can choose not to attend or watch.

Those UOB employees are not entertainers and they certainly were not there to entertain. They were in a multi-racial setting and they, of all people, should have known that their action (of painting their faces black) could spark off a furore.

I am often shocked when I encounter how ignorant Singaporeans are when it comes to knowing and understanding the cultures of the 3 main races here in Singapore.

To paint all members of a race with one broad brush(pardon the pun) is perhaps what defines a stereotype and people can always make excuses for living in a world of stereotypes but I would firmly argue that we should start breaking these stereotypes down.

Well, it looks like its going to be a long hard battle. The newest NBA basketball sensation, Jeremy Lin, who is an American (born and bred), of Taiwanese Chinese descent and plays for the New York Knicks, was not spared the racial slurs.

A famous ESPN sports commentator was heard using the word “chink” in an indirect reference to Lin. He was later suspended by ESPN for 30 days. A few days later, his colleague an editor from the ESPN mobile website posted the following headline – “”Chink in the Armor: Jeremy Lin’s 9 Turnovers Cost Knicks in Streak-Snapping Loss to Hornets.”. That was his last headline as he was summarily fired by ESPN within hours of the headline appearing.

Fox Sports columnist, Jason Whitlock, then twittered about Lin’s extraordinary 38 point performance against the Lakers by making a needless and an unfunny remark about his size of his manhood. He then offered an apology by describing his behaviour as “immature, sophomoric”. And to top it, guess what…he blamed it on his penchant for comedy and maintained that he still wanted to be a stand-up comedian, what else?

Why are those guilty of making racial slurs so quick to find refuge under the convenient cover of comedy or “harmless” fun?

I personally know of “friends” who have used this convenient cover to launch sexual and racially tinged jokes at others in the group in a social setting. It is very tough to tell them off as it is couched in humour and if the target of these jokes reacts he or she may be perceived as  being a tight-assed prude.

But when these jokes become more frequent and are targeted at the same person all the time, it becomes tiresome and so unfunny. They are really put-downs and I am really surprised that the perpetrators of this unsavory social past-time are unable to see that they have exceeded the boundaries of decency and proper conduct. The best way to deal with these “jokers”, I guess, is to make oneself scarce around them and reduce your contact time with them.

Invitation to Participate in New Social Media Poll

For those who are interested in some background information about the proposal for a code of conduct for online behaviour, please read my blog “The Golden Rule To Live By On The Internet” dated 20 Dec 2011, below.

Thank You To One And All

Dear Friends and Readers,

As the curtains fall on 2011 and the dawn of the New Year 2012 is preparing to break, I cannot but end the year by thanking all my loyal readers and those who have contributed their thoughts and given their inputs to the blogs that I have posted.

Starting this blog was difficult at first but I am glad that I did it and I hope to continue posting in the new year and I hope to count on your support.

I cannot help but also look back at this year and wonder what an eventful year it has been. Many luminaries have departed from this world but have left their light still shining on us for our own enlightenment. I was thinking of people like Steve Jobs, actors and directors like Elizabeth Taylor and Sidney Lumet, former 60 minutes broadcaster, Andy Rooney, and sportsmen like boxer Joe Frazier and cricketer Basil D’Oliveira. We remember them not only because of their skill and brilliance in what they did but inspite of their faults, (of which there maybe many) because they are only human and it did not stop them from making their mark in our society and influencing us positively.

And is it just me or 2011 seemed like a record year for disasters and natural calamities. I can remember the Wenzhou high speed train collision, the Fatehpur train derailment in India and the floods in various parts of the world, China, Thailand, Philippines, Ireland, Italy and Brazil and the U.S. (Mississippi & Misouri). The perennial hurricanes and tornados in the U.S. also seem to occur with higher frequency and greater force.

Terrorist threats have not waned either but look to be surfacing in more sinister forms.

But the one image or development that has caught my fancy and attention is how social media has helped the ordinary man in the street reclaim his democratic right to be heard in autocratic regimes around the world, sparked by the now well documented Arab Spring early in the year. The dominoes started to fall once the spark was set off in Tunisia, which then spread to Egypt and Libya and neighbouring Arab states. People organised themselves swiftly and with stunning effect by using social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter.

But their pursuit of freedom and democratic rights was not achieved without any cost. Many lives were lost as the demagogues of the regimes tried to retain their stranglehold on power by turning the guns on the people. And just as we remember the luminaries I hope we will spend some time remembering all those who gave up their lives in the hope that their loved ones will have a better one.

In Singapore, history was created when the opposition won a GRC (Group Representation Constituency) in the May 2011 general elections, ushering in 4 members of opposition Workers Party into Parliament. Political discussions on the net increased several fold and candidates were examined and scrutinised in a way that was never possible before. Accountability has become paramount as transparency was pursued, facilitated by the new media.

The new year brings with it new hope and a resolution to better the things that we can change and to live with those that we cannot. I hope we will have the strength and the will to do just that in 2012.

I wish all of you a happy and meaningful 2012!

Cheers,
Herald

—————————————————————————————————————

Japan Earthquake

The killer earthquake that hit Japan on Friday, 11 Mar 2011, and the colossal tsunami that followed made the headlines in all the major newspapers and news websites. I was speechless and quite simply shocked by the extent of damage and destruction brought about by the tsunami especially in the coastal cities in north-eastern Japan, in the city of Sendai in Miyagi prefecture, not to mention the thousands of lives which have perished. The death toll is expected reach tens of thousands.

What is more worrisome is the nuclear plant in Fukushima prefecture, where damage to the cooling systems has resulted in the meltdown of the core fuel rods causing a radiation leak. Foreigners and especially foreign professionals and work permit holders have made a beeline for the airport to take the first flight back home. They feared exposure to the radiation leak and that was a risk they were not willing to take, not when the stakes include your life. The impact of this tragedy on Japan’s economy will be substantial but generating economic growth is taking a back seat to the more urgent task of saving lives.

The land of the rising sun where new hopes and dreams blossom with the birth of each new day, is fast looking like the land of despair and the hopeless. Still there was calm stoicism amidst scenes of ravaged seaside towns, littered with muddied debris, destroyed homes, banged up cars and trucks, boats and even a propeller plane left stranded among the debris in the middle of an intersection.

The people of Japan are up against it, again, 70 years after World War II. But they are showing remarkable courage in the midst of such devastation that is enough to make grown men cry. I read in the Sunday Times, 13 Mar 2011, that in a survey about whether one felt confident that one has the financial resources to retire early, the Japanese and Koreans fared poorly, with most saying that they will need to work longer to fund their retirement.

The scale of this new tragedy seemed to put life into perspective for me. Life is so fragile and fleeting. We work so hard and sometimes to the point of sacrificing precious time for our family and ourselves, let alone for our community and especially to the under-privileged. Yet in a cruel twist of fate, Mother Nature, seemingly provoked to act explosively, can unleash her anger in such a lethal and spectacular fashion, reducing everything that we have worked for over decades to nothing in a matter of minutes. This is scary!

It puts everything into perspective. It makes the squabbles we may have with our neighbour or with our work-mates seem petty or insignificant, even juvenile. This tragedy reminds me to take life, each day, as it comes and to cherish each day, as if it will be my last. But can I?
“Do not take life too seriously. You will never get out of it alive.” – publisher & writer, Elbert Hubbard

The Golden Rule To Live By On The Internet

Can we live in a world without any rules or laws? Perhaps this question is more rhetorical than anything else. I’m sure the most ardent freedom rights supporter will readily agree that no society can function without some rules or else there will be chaos.

So why have the recent debate on the net regarding the need for rules or guidelines to govern social media raised some concerns among netizens?

Is it because with the advent of the Internet many academics, technologists and sociologists have spoken vociferously about how this new technological platform is a “game changer” in terms of how business will be conducted, how society will be managed and, indeed, how all of us will live our lives.

For some time, these same people have also predicted that Internet could NOT be controlled or regulated and as such this spelled trouble for businesses, organisations and governments who were still tied to the old paradigms and top-down systems which concentrated powers in the hands of the elite few. Thomas L Friedman said so as much in his commentary in the Today paper, “The democratisation of expectations”, pg 12, 19 Dec 2011.

Friedman quoted Mr Dov Seidman, CEO of LRN, “The old system of ‘command and control’ – carrots and sticks – to exert power over people is fast being replaced by ‘connect and collaborate’ – to generate power through people…you have to have two-way conversation that connects deeply with your citizens or customers or employees.”

(You may want to watch this video for an interesting take on this argument, taking a slightly contrarian view)

RSA Animate – The Internet in Society: Empowering or Censoring Citizens?
– Watch more Tech Videos at Vodpod.

While by and large this argument still holds sway in today’s world, there is an increasing recognition of the need to bring some order to the frenetic pace of how information is formed and distributed in the Internet, particularly in social media platforms because of the confusion and potential disharmony that it may generate later.

Take recent examples of what happened in Singapore. Racists comments made by a blogger, Donaldson Tan, on Facebook against Muslims and particularly his post which had a picture of a “haram” animal superimposed on the Ka’ba – Islam’s most sacred site.

Then we had the much publicised incident of Jason Neo, a Young PAP member who had posted online a photo of a school bus with Malay children from Huda Kindergarten in Woodlands dressed in their uniform which includes traditional Malay headwear. Neo had posted an offensive caption for the photo saying, “Bus filled with young terrorist trainees?”. Neo has since resigned from the PAP and has drawn stern criticisms from PAP members themselves.

Even celebrities were not spared the consternation and criticism where the content is less controversial and may even be described as helpful to the public. For example, Radio DJ Hossan Leong was criticised for announcing a breakdown in the SMRT Circle Line based on information from tweets and for not waiting for the official confirmation from SMRT. But MediaCorp Radio clarified that it relies on both formal and informal channels, i.e. information from its listeners when reporting on traffic and public transport disruptions. Nevertheless, Leong admitted that he should have announced that the information was unverified and that he was still awaiting official word from SMRT

I suspect Leong’s reliance on social media to offer a public service drew such an uproar (largely from the transport operator) because of the recent furore over the train disruptions which saw SMRT being at the receiving end of commuters’ ire.

But it also raises concerns on how governments, corporations, employees, customers, teachers/educators, students and in fact people from all sectors of society should conduct themselves when using social media.

It is a concern that has been expressed from the very top. Last month, Minister for Information Communication and the Arts, Dr Yaacob Ibrahim called for some guidelines on a code of conduct for online behaviour. He felt that the guidelines will allow for more moderation in the views people and allow for discussions to be more “rational and sensible”.

In Singapore, the chorus for some guidelines for online conduct and the use of social media is gaining more traction. Of course, there are detractors who lament that once again the government appears to be solving an issue by introducing more rules or restrictions on what people can or should do.

But I support the formation of some form of guidelines as long as these guidelines are drafted with input from the grassroots or from academic institutions, civic bodies and/or voluntary groups with the same bodies acting as watchdogs to be on the look-out for offenders.

Just last week, Professor Ang Peng Hwa, Director of the Singapore Internet Research Centre, NTU, announced his proposed framework for such a code of conduct. For more information on his proposals, you can click on the link below:

http://newasiarepublic.com/?p=35105

Among the things that his proposal seeks to clarify are how you define “hate speech” or “offensive content” who is a “whistle-blower”, how to distinguish between those who advocate and those who report offensive content and how to specify punishment.

Aside from these guidelines, what I hope to see develop in Singapore are clear policy statements by the various government and civic organisations, academic institutions and companies on the use of social media. This has already taken place in corporations and institutions overseas.

Taking my own example as a lecturer in a polytechnic, there have already been much discourse on whether lecturers should “friend” their students on Facebook or whether lecturers should use Facebook as a teaching and learning tool. And the views have been divided.

Some students have been caught for flaming certain lecturers with their online rants thinking that their posts are private and cannot be traced and they were dead wrong.

Some lecturers feel that social media should be embraced rather than avoided as it is the platform of choice among our youth. Classes these days rarely run without the use of laptops and with the ubiquitous access to Internet in campus, it is almost impossible to prevent students from logging on to social media sites.

But fundamental to all these discussions have been the need for control and privacy and the need to distinguish between the professional self from the private individual. This is where a well thought out social media policy would be of great help to all parties and the national initiative to draft a code of conduct for internet content could serve as a larger umbrella framework for such policy statements.

One thing is for sure. The wheels have been set in motion and it is only a matter of time when the guidelines for code of conduct for online content will be formulated.

And as far as rules go, perhaps people’s online behaviour should be governed by what is widely known and accepted as The Golden Rule in many cultures around the world – “In everything do to others as you would have them do to you.”

Remembering Steve Jobs

STEVE JOBS

1955 – 2011

http://www.ted.com/talks/steve_jobs_how_to_live_before_you_die.html

Of Guns, Blackberries, Curries And A Chart Topping Song

What do flash mobs, a song climbing up the pop charts, political unrest and technology all have in common. Well, I’m not sure myself but I’m aiming to kinda of link them all here.

In the history of humanity, we have countless examples of things that we have invented or made which have helped us progress, develop and become more advanced. However, these same inventions, when in the possession of wrong hands, have the potential to cause damage to society or cause the society as a whole to deteriorate.

The invention of gun powder, guns and later on the hand gun is one example. In the hands of an expert hunter or a sane, benign human being, guns can be used to help bring food to the table or bring down a dangerous animal on the loose. However, in the hands of a cold-blooded killer, it brings death, suffering and grief.

Now in the age of social media questions are being asked as to whether new laws are needed to control its use in our society.

I’m sure you have heard of the flash mob. If you have not, well its just a “spontaneous” gathering of people at a public place where they perform an act, after which they disappear quickly. The aim of the act is just to entertain or amuse the public.

The first successful flash mob was conducted in Manhattan on 3 June 2003 by Bill Wasik, senior editor of Harper’s Magazine, where 130 people converged at the 9th floor rug department of Macy’s department store. All of them gathered around an expensive rug and answered a sales assistant that they were shopping for a “love rug”.

Nowadays, flash mobs are being used as an innovative way of raising awareness to a particular issue or marketing a service or product.

What is key to this social phenomenon is that flash mobs are usually organised through sms-es from your mobile phone or social media like Facebook or Twitter.

We all love social media for how it brings people together. It is an amazing tool in communicating freely and openly and absolutely fabulous in helping people interact with each other.

But recent events have raised concerns that the mobile phone and social media sites are becoming dangerous tools.

The recent riots in Britain and the Arab Spring uprising earlier in the year, provide interesting perspectives into how a variation of the basic idea of a flash mob was used in contrasting ways and with different consequences.

In the Arab Spring uprising in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya people angry and frustrated with the autocratic political regimes in their countries, decided to organise rallies and demonstrations to show their displeasure and demand change. These were all done through mobile phones and social media.

Western democracies lauded the use of mobile technology and social media saying that the people’s voices must be heard and that civil liberties are universal rights that must be respected.

But how things took an interesting twist during the August 3rd riots in Britain. Here, the police were stretched as mobs looted shops, raided houses and robbed people in 3 hellish nights of inexplicable random violence which spread to major cities in England, like London, Birmingham and Manchester.

These opportunistic mobs were organised using Twitter and mobile phone sms-es. Some of these messages gave notice of a looting that was to occur at a particular location at a pre-determined time and asked people to join in like as if it was some kind of New Year’s party celebration. One could say that this is taking the flash mob to a different, more sinister level.

Specifically, 20-year old Jordan Blackshaw was sentenced to 4 years imprisonment for using Facebook to create an event, describing it as a “massive Northwich lootin”. Similarly 22-year old Perry Sutcliffe-Keenan, also received the same sentence for creating a Facebook page, “Warrington Riots”, providing a time and place to get involved in a riot. But what was unusual about these sentences was that neither of these Facebook posts resulted in any actual looting or violence sparking some comments saying that the sentences were highly disproportionate with the severity of the crime.

The David Cameron government is now looking at the possibility of enacting more laws to give the police more powers in searching and identifying trouble-makers using mobile phones and social media to organise violence.

But Arab political watchers are saying that the British government’s latest study of social media laws contrasted with what it said about social media in the Arab Spring, a case of using the arguments to suit the occasion, prompting accusations of being insincere and serving political interests. During the Arab Spring, social media was viewed as useful aids in promoting the cause of democracy, inspite of the widespread violence it inadvertently created when police and security forces clashed with the demonstrators.

Despite all the bad press about social media, it cannot be over-emphasized that it is a great platform for organising and rallying people for a good cause. The latest social media event in Singapore, for example, was the National Cook Curry Day, which happens to be today, 21 August 2011. This was a call going out to all Singaporeans to cook their favourite curry today as a symbol of embracing all things uniquely Singaporean and at the same time educating foreign guests and foreign talent who live amidst us, about our unique way of life.

Well, all this brings me back to what I said earlier. Things, especially that which are invented by us, like mobile phones or social media like Twitter and Facebook are neutral. They are not intrinsically dangerous or harmful. However, people who use these tools, are the ones who exercise the power over how they are used and for what purposes. And we all know, with great power, comes great responsibility. People have to stand up and take responsibility for their actions.

I would like to end by sharing with you a song that I heard in a music store and later on Youtube with my sons. Both my sons loved it and started bobbing their heads to the tune and doing a little jig. I loved the song very much as well and started humming the tune while taking my bath. Imagine our shock when I found out that the song was actually about disenfranchised youth who do not fit in with our fast developing society. Unable to withstand the pressure of trying to fit in and belong, they decided to end it all by taking the gun and go on a shooting spree. Ring any bells? – Columbine, Virgina Tech and Westroads Mall, the latter the apparent subject of the song.

Guns or mobile phones – in the hands of a madman, can be a dangerous thing.

By the way, the song is Pumped Up Kicks. You can watch the video on the vodpod screen in the top right hand side of this page.

The Outing Of Ryan Giggs – Social Media Flexes Its Power

I have been mulling over whether to blog about this issue for several weeks but I’ve finally decided that it’s just too important a topic to ignore. Being a big fan of Man U and Ryan Giggs, in particular, I struggled at first to come to terms with the fact that one of my greatest football idols, is a cheat and has been outed by the power of social media, in this case Twitter.

The Manchester United winger, has managed over the major part of his football career, to uphold the wholesome image of a consumate professional and loving family man, which I believe, he still is, inspite of this latest scandal. However, we cannot deny the fact that his affair with Welsh former beauty queen and reality show, Big Brother star, Imogen Thomas, has put a huge dent on his image and in his standing as a role model for young people and footballers in particular.

What is central to the debate here? It is not that social media has outed a football star who is adored and admired by millions of fans worldwide, thus destroying perhaps their one pure and untainted image of a British footballer that they hold dear in the altar of their hearts. It is all the more understandable why people feel crushed by the Giggs news because British football is more well-known for the brutish behaviour of its footballers who are regular fodder for the tabloids. British football is often connected with the drinking and pub culture of its star performers who inevitably are dragged into the seedier underworld of social escorts and high class hookers. Many thought that Ryan Giggs was different and unique in that he was an exemplary professional who took care of himself (he does yoga) which was the secret to his longevity in the sport.

Giggs, aware of how much people adored him and how important it was to uphold that image, took out a “super injunction”, which is basically a court order to stop media from reporting on rumours circulating in the Internet and fueled by Twitter messages, about Giggs’ affair with Thomas.

Giggs’ lawyers then took legal action to force Twitter to reveal the names of those who had broken the injunction and mentioned Giggs’ name in their “twits”. But Liberal Democrat MP John Hemming blew open the whole scandal and shattered any remnants of secrecy that shrouded it by naming Ryan Giggs as the footballer involved in the affair under protection of parliamentary privilege which shielded him from any legal action by Giggs’ lawyers.

Hemming’s point: The news was out there already. Everybody who was “twittering” knew it and knew Giggs was involved. And therefore, the gag order imposed by the courts on the media, was a farce, as it failed to protect the identity of the star footballer, as news travels at lightning speed in social media networks and all participants in the network collectively frame and shape the message. This make social media inherently difficult to control and its advocates do not necessarily think this is a weakness.

There is a lively debate in the UK on the future of the laws of injunction and privacy with the emergence of the Giggs-Imogen affair. Check out this youtube video,
http://youtu.be/dJ-c7K4N1dc

The last part of the video puts into correct perspective what these laws are about. Its not just about protecting the privacy of celebrities and the rich and famous so that their multi-million dollar brands are protected. These laws are there to protect the medical records of patients and things like wills and inheritances, etc. So there is no question about the need for these laws, I feel, but there needs to be some tweaking of these laws to take into consideration the impact of social media and to which extent these “new” media platforms can discuss matters that have been tagged with a gag order.

For example, if a “twitterer” knows that a matter is under a gag order, then s/he should avoid discussing it in his or her twits. It was revealed that some of the “twitterers” in the Giggs affair were actually talking about the super-injunction, which means they were aware of the gag order and so it can be argued that they knowingly “twittered” about it, thus breaking the injunction and so leaving themselves open to being charged with a crime. Twitterers may disagree and I would be eager to hear their viewpoints.

Even so, some social commentators have said Giggs’ super injunction has worked against him and has actually fuelled the social media frenzy causing him to be in the predicament he is in now.

It’s clear that the law and social media have some ways yet to go to sort out a comfortable middle path where people’s right to freedom of speech and expression can travel on the same highway as people’s need for privacy.

U.S. President Abraham Lincoln was quoted to have said this about freedom or liberty:
” The shepherd drives the wolf from the sheep’s throat, for which the sheep thanks the shepherd as his liberator, while the wolf denounces him for the same act, as the destroyer of liberty. Plainly the sheep and the wolf are not agreed upon a definition of the word liberty.”

—————————————————————————————————————

As a background story on Ryan Giggs and Manchester United, please read on:

I have waited sooooo long for Man U’s current crop of players to top what Ryan Giggs did in Man U’s 1999 FA Cup Semi-Final against Arsenal.

And I’m glad to say my wait is finally over. Wayne Rooney scored an unbelievable goal yesterday in the Barclays Premier League derby match against neighbours, Man City.

Its was an overhead kick (sometimes called bicycle kick), executed with perfect timing, precision and power and it found the top right corner, beating two frustrated defenders and a stunned goalkeeper who just stood rooted, overwhelmed by its sheer genius.

Nani, Man U’s Portuguese winger, went down the right and sent a cross to the centre. The ball was behind Rooney and he made a split second decision to first time the ball with an overhead kick.

Its a goal worthy of winning any match and win Man U did, 2-1. Absolutely stunning and jaw dropping!!!

How Can The Government Best Get Honest Feedback From Citizens?

I was reading the Today newspaper today and came across some articles which questioned how can the government best reach out to Singaporeans and engage them. This sudden interest in listening to citizens and taking their views into consideration when making policies seems to be taking centre stage following the lead of PM Lee Hsien Loong after his recent announcements about reviewing policies including ministerial salaries.

Why not just do a poll to find out the answer? Is’nt that what the new media is about and does best?

So may I invite you to take part in this poll on how best can the government engage citizens? Please take a few seconds to cast your vote.

Thanks!

Post-Election Celebrations & Post-Mortems Begin

I spent the evening of the 7 May 2011, election night, at the home of a very good friend of mine, who generously offered me and my family dinner before we sat ourselves comfortably on the sofa in his living room, to watch the election results on TV on CNA.

As the night wore on, it became clear that the full results will only be known well into the early hours of the next day, 8 May 2011, but my friend and I were determined to sit through the whole coverage on TV as we sensed that this was going to be a historical elections. The 9 days of campaigning before this were intense, marked by a tremendous outpouring of emotions by both the candidates and the electorate, thus signaling that somehow this elections was going to be different. And it was.

The headline news of this elections can be summarised as follows:

* The incumbent PAP won 81 out of the 87 seats in parliament, giving it the overwhelming majority to form the next government. The PAP got 60.1% of the popular vote, down 6% points from the 2006 elections.

* The WP has etched its name into the annals of Singapore political history by breaking the PAP stranglehold in the GRC wards and snaring the most hotly contested ward of Aljunied GRC. It has emerged as the new force in Singapore opposition politics, taking 6 seats and 46.6% of the votes cast in the wards it contested in, a 8% improvement from 2006.

* The WP’s winning of the prized Aljunied GRC has resulted in the ousting of PAP stalwart, Foreign Minister Mr George Yeo and Ms Lim Hwee Hua, Minister in PM’s Office.

* The SPP, opposition veteran politician, Mr Chiam See Tong’s party, bowed out by failing to secure any seat, including its stronghold of Potong Pasir.

* The SDP, which fielded a strong slate of new candidates, was the most improved party, garnering 36.8% of the popular vote, a 13.6% increase from 2006.

* The NSP which contested the most number of wards this time round, secured 39.3% of the votes, the second highest among the opposition parties.

The PAP has reason to celebrate. It was returned to power with a solid mandate of 60% which is impressive by any first world standard.

The WP has reason to celebrate because its historic winning of the GRC gives hopes to other opposition parties to do likewise. It also possibly gives credence to the idea that a 2-party system may emerge in Singapore, an idea that has been brushed aside by the PAP as not workable.

The SDP has reason to celebrate because its extensive use of new media and its “softer” image brought on by a new branding strategy has won over many admirers as reflected in its achievement as the most improved party in this elections.

Danny Bear, The SDP Mascot

However, I feel the SDP secretary-general, Dr Chee Soon Juan, may still be the albatross around the party’s neck because his previous abrasive and confrontational political style does not sit comfortably with many. Even a hint of any remnants of this style still being harboured by the party will undermine its efforts to re-brand itself.

In fact, some online political websites have criticized a local newspaper for striking a telling blow in SDP’s chances of a good showing in the run-up to polling day. The party was supposed to have put a close fight with the PAP in the Holland-Bukit Timah GRC led by Dr Vivian Balakrishnan.

Dr Vincent Wijeysingha

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan

But the results showed otherwise, with Dr Vivian securing 60.1% of the votes and the Dr Vincent Wijeysingha’s SDP team garnering nearly 40%.

Some people said one of the factors could have been negative reports from The New Paper that questioned whether Dr Chee was a loose canyon, while saying that he appeared ready to lead a group of supporters in a march. This caused a backlash from netizens who created a Facebook page asking for a boycott of The New Paper.

The NSP’s future as one of heavyweights among the opposition parties in Singapore is uncertain. But what is certain is, it has introduced to Singapore a rough diamond in Nicole Seah who has won admirers, even among the PAP.

SM Goh Chok Tong has said that Nicole communicated well with people, both the young and the old. SM Goh’s Marine Parade GRC’s percentage of the votes was 56.7% and its winning margin was a less than impressive 13.3%, prompting him to say that his young team-mate, Ms Tin Pei Lin was a factor.

His guarded support of Ms Tin despite her shortcomings in connecting with the youth, (which was the main reason she was fielded in the first place), seems to suggest that the jury is still out on whether the PAP will retain Ms Tin as a candidate in the next elections. Her performance as the representative for MacPherson will be crucial to her survival.

This elections has indeed been one of the most exciting and memorable for me personally and I suspect for many Singaporeans. The cut and thrust of rally speeches by candidates as they debated policies and issues was followed enthusiastically by many, thanks to new media.

People got involved, especially the younger voters in the 20s and 30s, by contributing ideas and comments in blogs and on political websites. Many of these Gen Y voters also volunteered their time to the various parties.

The apparent stigma of being associated with an opposition party is also disappearing, which is acting as a catalyst to spur more participation among their ranks. This political awakening among the Gen Y voters is a positive development for Singapore which has long been labeled as a nation of apathetic people who have given their mandate to the government to be their proxy in all matters of public policy.

The current rhetoric from the PAP, post-elections, that it has heard the people and that it will have to communicate a lot better with the people and try to meet their aspirations and higher expectations, has got a lot of the voters nodding their heads in approval. And this is a positive outcome of GE 2011 which we can all take pride in.

However, I feel a great sadness in the exit of Mr George Yeo, a PAP stalwart, who I admire a great deal. Many of the voters in Aljunied GRC have made it clear that it is not personal but it was a vote against the PAP, the party, which I think is scant comfort for Mr Yeo.

He was the original reformer who had called for a change within the PAP when he first came into public office in 1988. He has made his mark in international fora as Foreign Minister and has gained the respect of many ASEAN government ministers.

Mr George Yeo was among the first Singapore political leaders to make the call to nurture Singapore’s soul even as she develops her physical infrastructure and economy at an unrelenting pace. The PAP will do well to resurrect this ethos espoused by Mr Yeo, if it is not to lose more ground in the next elections. Even though the ouster of Mr George Yeo is a great loss for Singapore, I believe we have not seen the last of him. A political resurrection of sorts could just be on the cards…I hope:-).

New Media Makes An Impact in Singapore GE 2011

Somehow this General Elections 2011 seems to have a buzz that I felt was’nt there in the past couple of elections. A few factors maybe responsible for that. One of them could well be that all but one of the constituencies will be contested this time round (82 out of 87 seats, I believe). And for once in a very long time for some of us, the Singaporean voters will get a chance to vote.

But I think there is something else. Something perhaps not as obvious and maybe even hardly perceptible. I believe, its the widespread use of new media which resonates with the youths of today. These youths, the digital natives, are getting involved in the GE partly because of the technology that is available today, high-speed broadband internet connections on portable devices like laptops and iPhones on multiple social media platforms like Facebook (FB), Twitter (TW) and Youtube.

Mainstream media, like television and newspapers are relics of the past as far as these youths are concerned. That’s not to say that traditional media is not important anymore. They are still the main sources of information for the older generation. And they are trying to win over more viewers in ways that have not been tried before like the Channel News Asia’s Political Forum to discuss issues affecting Singapore, where it invited 5 political parties to air and debate their views.

The new media buzz in GE 2011 has been given a boost by the new rules governing use of new media during campaigning and election advertising. Some of these new rules include the following:

1) allowing the use of podcasts, Youtube videos and social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter
2) allowing parties to distribute and exhibit live recordings of lawful election activities during the election period
3) doing away with the need to send films/videos of live recordings of election activities to the Board of Film Censors for classification

However, parties have to declare in advance the types of new media platforms that they intend to use for election advertising within 12 hours of the start of campaigning

The ruling People’s Action Party (PAP), has a website, http://www.pap.org.sg/ which opens to a video presentation of its manifesto skillfully executed as a flipchart carrying a combination of photos, animated pictures and figures representing the issues of the day, accompanied by the tune of the oft-heard National Day song, “This Is Home”. There are also videos presented as thumbnails highlighting election speeches and podcasts. A map of Singapore showing all the constituencies represented in different colours. Just click on any of these and you will be brought to a new page that will give you all the information regarding the constituency, for example the number of electors, number of MPs if it is a GRC, photos of candidates, viewpoints, videos and FB and Twitter pages.

The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) is probably the one party which has expressly stated that new media is the lynchpin in its overall elections strategy. It has said that the new media provides it with an effective way of bypassing traditional media to reach its target audience. The SDP website, http://yoursdp.org/ is pretty well designed and updated which aids visitors in its navigation. One cannot but notice its “Please Donate – Support Democracy!” icon in the top right panel urging supporters to donate to its cause with a drop-down menu specifying the dollar amounts from $10 to $1000. There is also a mention of a corporate sponsor, in the name of Conti Components who has given SDP a free banner space on its company website. SDP’s manifesto is also quite attractively divided into big thumbnails highlighting different issues which makes for easier reference and reading.

But the Workers’ Party (WP) and National Solidarity Party (NSP) are not far behind in developing their new media capabilities and have attractively designed websites as well. The Workers’ Party website, http://wp.sg/wpge/ has an icon that allows you to subscribe to its youtube channel. Its manifesto is prominently marked as a button at the top of its homepage. Key highlights are given. Pictures of the rallies are available and prominently displayed all provided by Razor TV.

The NSP’s website is distinctive with its bright orange theme, its party colours. The website, http://nsp.sg/, is fronted by the videos of the party’s political broadcast on TV and its star catch Nicole Seah’s campaign rally speech; The party’s manifesto is available as a button at the top of the website and is presented pretty much in the same manner as the WP.

While all the major political parties have a web presence and are using new media strategies to varying degrees, I sense that the opposition parties are quietly rejoicing at the “doors” that are being opened in the virtual world to voters’ homes through the new media platforms. These platforms help to make up for their lack of on-the-ground familiarity with voters due primarily to the fact that they are not the incumbents, the constituents’ representatives in parliament.

In fact this point was highlighted by Dr James Gomez of SDP (candidate standing at Sembawang GRC) at one of the rallies recently. He said that SDP uses the internet to reach out to voters thus implying that it is a progressive and modern party. He then criticized the PAP for its old-fashioned door-to-door knocking of resident’s homes to canvass for votes. This drew a stiff rebuttal from PAP’s Mr Christopher De Souza (candidate standing at Holland-Bukit Timah GRC), who said he strongly disagreed that door-to-door knocking approach was ineffective because nothing could replace the personal touch and seeing and talking with voters face-to-face to get a deeper sense of their concerns.

In fact I recall reading a Straits Times article dated 30 April 2011, “The politician and the Gen Y voter”, by Judith Tan, on how Mr De Souza’s co-candidate and team leader of Holland-Bukit Timah GRC, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan met a voter at Senja LRT station and spent 30 minutes discussing with him issues that concerned him. One of the issues apparently was about how Dr Vivian brought up the question of SDP candidate, Dr Vincent Wijeysingha’s sexual orientation and whether the SDP is pursuing a gay agenda. That received a wave of criticism from netizens, some of them on Dr Vivian’s own FB page, which were removed. The voter, in his 20s, asked Dr Vivian why he did not just allow the critical posts to be published on his FB page and reply to them instead of removing them. Dr Vivian replied that maybe he was just old-fashioned in terms of his value system and that he still needed to” look into people’s eyes and shake their hands”. Dr Vivian then asked if he would get his vote to which the voter replied “Yes” unless Dr Wijeysingha meets him in person and can convince him of something better.

The apparent conclusion that maybe drawn from the above chance encounter between Dr Vivian and a “Gen Y” voter is that these new voters still place value in face-to-face meetings and do not totally rely on new media to get to know the candidates and their agenda and what they stand for.

A related new media issue in this elections is whether this new cohort of Gen Y, digital native, voters are easily swayed by form rather than substance. New media, (like video podcasts and FB) are useful assets for beautiful, telegenic or “videogenic” candidates. Case in point 24 year old NSP candidate, Ms Nicole Seah. Perhaps the highlight of GE 2011’s clash of the young guns, Ms Seah has been pitted against the PAP’s “baby” Ms Tin Pei Lin by the media. Ms Seah’s delicate features and long, flowing tresses are raising the pulses of men, young and old, while heating up the election campaign rally meter with her speeches.
Nicole Seah’s FB page now has more than 53,000 hits (and rising), one of the highest among all the candidates in GE 2011. Ms Seah’s popularity is without question prompting some netizens to call NSP the Nicole Seah Party, but she has also shown a confidence and maturity far beyond her years. On the other hand, Ms Tin has received criticisms for appearing a little unsure and hesitant when answering questions from the media, thus raising some concerns regarding her ability to represent voters’ concerns effectively. However, noone can and should question Ms Tin’s earnestness and sincerity in wanting to serve the residents of MacPherson under the Marine Parade GRC. The new media has certainly brought into close focus the candidate’s ability to project the “right” image which tends to hold sway with the audience because the candidate’s innate abilities are often not portrayed.

Lastly, any discussion on GE 2011 will not be complete without some mention of the hottest contested seat, which is the Aljunied GRC. Over there, WP’s Low Thia Kiang is leading his “A” team against the incumbent PAP’s team led by Foreign Minister George Yeo. WP has used new media to press home rebuttals against the PAP’s criticisms that the WP’s campaign manifesto’s slogan of “Towards A First World Parliament” is flawed. Only time will tell, whether voters buy into WP’s slogan and in large enough numbers to de-seat Mr George Yeo and his team.

Finally, I came across a unique micro-site which brings together on a single page, news, blogs and conversations about the GE presented in simple, bite-sized bits. The information is presented by using the “visualization” technique, dividing social media chatter into positive and negative categories. You can click on the various parties to see which party has been getting more positive vis-a-vis negative comments. The URL is http://sgpartyti.me/. Check it out!

TV & Radio Licences Abolished

“Finally!” said one of my friends. Another exclaimed, “Its about time man!”

The annual radio and TV licence fees which the MDA collects has been scrapped. The fees first introduced in 1963, has been abolished as the government feels that it is an outdated form of public charge or levy given the huge leap in technological advancement since then.

The $120-132.5 million collected each year goes into the funding of public service broadcasts (PSBs) like children’s shows, educational programmes and programmes catering to the minority groups. But many people have questioned the need to pay these fees especially when they do not watch these programmes.

But a few questions have come up to the fore following the announcement. One of them – What’s going to happen to PSB programmes? Will these programmes continue to be produced? Typically, around 3000 hours of PSB programming are produced each year. Are there any benefits in having these programmes in our 7 free-to-air channels?

MDA CEO Mr Aubeck Kam has said, “…MDA will work closely with the industry to continuously improve the quality and reach of PSB content, including making them available on new platforms, in step with Singaporeans’ changing media habits”.

If one were to analyse this statement closely, one could surmise PSB programmes will continue to be produced without any loss in quality. What is interesting, though, is the possible push to make PSB programmes more widely available to the audience and on new platforms. This may mean producing programmes more for the online platform and/or producing for cross platforms. So we could be seeing PSB programmes being launched on xinmsn portal and perhaps on the free-to-air channels later, showing the importance of the internet platform as the number broadband users increase significantly over the years.

Will PSB programmes continue to be assessed on the public service character of its programming more than their ability to generate enough returns or what industry experts call a decent ROI (return on investment)?

By their very nature, PSB programmes, do not generate the kind of ROI that other more “commercial” programmes are likely to do for example, a Channel 8 drama which has higher ratings, like The Little Nonya. So it would be unfair to expect these programmes to do so. But a cross-platform strategy, pushing these PSB programmes to the niche audience in a more targeted manner, via mobile, iPad, online, etc, could actually make some commercial sense.

And why is it important to sustain the PSB programming sector aside from the obvious benefits to its niche audience? Well its because of the opportunities it presents to the local small and medium sized production houses to have a steady stream of projects to work on which also ensure that they can remain in business. It is important to support our local production houses if we want to encourage a vibrant local film and media industry.

Mediapolis@ one north Gets Cracking

Its been about 2 years since the Singapore government announced its grand vision of a digital media hub at one north – Mediapolis. But all the same its great to see that things are finally getting off the ground with the recent announcement at the ground-breaking ceremony for the first building to be built at Mediapolis, called Infinite Studios.

Infinite Studios will house 2 purpose built sound stages, one of which will be dedicated to motion capture techniques. Wow! Sounds great!

Production and Post-production group, Infinite Frameworks will be taking up 30% of the space in the building. The other tenant is expected to be Globecast Asia, a satellite uplink and downlink provider, capable of receiving and sending content around the world.

This development was welcome news for the Singapore media industry which has been under some gloomy skies lately with the announcement of the closure of 2 animation companies, Egg Story Creative Production and Storm Lion in December 2010.

Both these companies had strong credentials and were led by passionate and creative individuals but somehow passion and creativity were just not enough to save the companies following the 2008 financial crisis. That crisis scared off some of the investors who started pulling out, wanting to reduce their risk exposure.

This just goes to show how risky and finicky the world of film and media is. Professionals and talents who are drawn to the film and media industry should take heed and learn from this sad episode. Egg Story and Storm Lion had some great creative ideas but they all came to nought because they did not have a good, strong financier or they were not adequately plugged into the Hollywood studio based financing structure.

The speed with which technology is progressing in the media industry is quite staggering and breathless. But is Singapore moving fast enough to first, built the media infrastructure which must be scaleable and flexible enough to accommodate future changes and secondly, facilitate access for our media companies to make use of these technologies and services to produce content at a cheaper cost, thus reducing budgets and financing pressures? This may be one way of bypassing the need for a huge financier or Hollywood studio.

I suppose Singapore’s Mediapolis is designed solely as an answer to the above 2 questions and the ground-breaking ceremony for the 1st building has come none too soon.

Our media professionals need every ounce of support they can get from anyone and everyone and not just from the MDA. MICA Minister Mr Lui Tuck Yew has on several occasions said that the media and creative industries are not just important for boosting Singapore’s economy but they are important for helping foreigners and the international community make sense of our culture and our identity and what it means to be Singaporean. Seeing how other countries (U.S., India, China, S.Korea) are using their film industries to develop their soft power and gain prominence and influence in the world stage, Singapore should never under-estimate the power of a vibrant creative industry.

Well, behind every dark cloud is a silver lining and I for one, am hopeful that the future will be bright for the film and media industry in Singapore. It has to be!!