MDA needs to rethink censorship

Dear Editor,

I refer to the recent $10,000 fine imposed on StarHub Cable Vision (SCV) by the Media Development Authority (MDA) of Singapore. SCV featured two girls kissing in a commercial on MTV’s Mandarin-language channel.

While MDA sees it as a threat to dominant social and moral norms, alleging that the commercial “promoted lesbianism as acceptable and romantic”, we need to understand that there are diverse sexualities and sexual orientation that exist in our society.

Rather than promotion, we should be able to see it as a representation of lesbianism, which is unfortunately often either invisible, stereotyped or misunderstood. We should thus not allow the tyranny of the majority to marginalise other peoples.

Furthermore, it is not criminal here that two women are in passionate embrace and kissing. Such a policy only reflects the sex-negativity of Singaporeans and the denial of homosexuality as part of society. It also says a lot about the degree to which the government will allow sexual minorities to be represented.

The fears of the promotion, celebration and “spread” of homosexualism all stem from a stereotypical misunderstanding of homosexuality. Many are quick to assume that the media is all powerful and can totally influence or change one’s sexual orientation in this case.

It seems that MDA formulates its policies based on the positivist findings of Albert Bandura’s 1961 Bobo doll experiment, wherein children in the experiment are observed to assault the Bobo doll after watching an adult hitting it. Sexual orientation, like violent behaviour, is thought by the authorities to be learned, hence the need for disciplining through media control.

With a blinkered focus that only takes into account an audience’s relationship with media, we forget about the political influences of dominant moral communities, based on their numerical superiority, which shape the production and dissemination of media messages and images. Too much attention is placed on how we can censor and ban, so that people do not become “corrupt”, however defined by the dominant groups.

What I also find mystifying is that there is relatively not much attention and debate focused on the pervasive depictions of violence in the media, but rather larger concerns on homosexuality, which does not result in bloodshed or death. There are many television programmes that depict violence, its glorification, as well as vengeful violence. Acts of media violence often go unpunished and acts of love gets SCV a fine of $10,000.

Ho Chi Sam

MAS should regard it as an obligation to exchange mutilated notes

I REFER to the article ‘$50 notes with ‘KF’ mark: Defaced bills ‘command no value” (ST, 27 Mar).

While it is right for MAS to exchange mutilated notes for good ones in the event that they are accidentally given to us, I am surprised that MAS regards it as an ‘act of grace’ rather than an obligation.

If an ATM delivers defaced notes to me, a situation clearly beyond my control, and neither the bank nor MAS is willing to recognize the value of those notes, I can and will sue the bank for fraud.

Ng E-Jay

Police Follow Up on Singapore Protestor

I was a participant in the 15 March 2008 protest organized by SDP along with two of my young children.

On 20th March 2008, at about 9.45pm, while trying to put my two tired kids to sleep, a loud bang on my door jolted them up.

At the door, I was greeted by two non-uniformed police officers who identified themselves and told me that I was under investigation for participating in an illegal assembly and procession.

My questions are:

1) Since they could identify me as one of the protesters, I am sure they are well aware that I have two young children. Did they need to bang on my door so hard? Yes, my door bell is not working, but my ears are. I am certainly not deaf!

2) Is this police way of intimidating citizens who are not afraid of exercising their constitutional rights to participate in a peaceful protest?

3) Do the police want my young children to see them as intimidating figures rather than as "friendly neighborhood policemen", as they like to market themselves to be?

4) What has become of our society if even speaking up is a crime, citizen are being intimidated for doing so, and yet limping terrorists are out on the loose?

LaMei