The discourse that economic freedom equates to the most effective and efficient democracy seems to have become particularly overbearing in recent times, with other important factors of democracy taking a backseat. This has been the case in Singapore, where the country has become renowned for having one of the most unrestricted and highly developed economies in the world. Yet, putting this impressive feat aside, it must be noted that Singapore is far more restrictive when it comes to freedom of the press. Despite the majority of Singapore’s industries having unrequited autonomy, the freedom of the nation’s media industry is non-existent.
The trend of media restriction is not a new phenomenon for this island state, and has been occurring since the nation gained independence from the United Kingdom in 1965. Since then the People’s Action Party (PAP) has controlled parliament and the party also has a vested interest in the media industry through Temasek Holdings, an investment company that directly or indirectly controls the majority of the nation’s media. In addition to this, the state-owned Mediacorp runs all seven television channels and a number of radio stations. These facts have ensured that Reporters Without Borders gave Singapore a ranking of 133 in the last published figures of the Press Freedom Index, making it the worst performing country of all developed nations in terms of media freedom.
Perhaps the most infamous case of Singapore’s undemocratic media practice involved Said Zahari, an editor and journalist who went on strike in protest of the bias, censored coverage of the pro-government media. Zahari was subsequently imprisoned for 17 years and then following his acquittal, a film released in 2007 covering his side of the story was promptly banned.
Zahari’s experience was certainly horrendous and his case, among other less publicised ones, has led to an issue of self-censorship within Singapore’s media. Political scientist James Gomez points out that as a result of Zahari’s experience, other journalists are now reluctant to be overtly critical of the PAP when producing media content. The perceived pressure by the government has meant that many journalists are fearful of the potential outcome sensitive content may bring. Gomez goes a step further explaining that: “the state’s censorship of information through the decades has contributed to an inability of the people to formulate a sustained political critique or opinion, even if they want to.”
Although the views held by Gomez are somewhat bleak for politics and the media in Singapore, the prevalence of political blogs and new media technologies are now providing a valuable place for politically dissatisfied locals to voice their opinions. Much like in Australia, some of the most insightful opinions seem to be coming from small, independent online media sources. These sources ensure that democratic thinkers across the globe know that whilst Singapore is a rich nation in an economic sense, it is also a poor nation in an information sense.
