05 April 2008

Why the Films Act should be trashed

This piece of sweeping legislation makes criminals of all of us, yet in practical terms is pointless in the digital age. Full essay.


Anonymous said...

Very well said YB! If this kind of article can be published in the mainstream media as a commentary, then we would be truly a first-world-class democracy...

One observation I like to add from my personal experience is that silly enough, the censoring of political or alternative view movies has the EXACT OPPOSITE effect of what they want to do: it somehow glorifies the respective, adds credibility and interest to the film - and hence everyone wanst too watch it in YouTube!

I would never have seen the very informative Zahari film by See, and so did many thousands of Singaporeans - OK I just checked - Singapore Rebel (Sees movie on Chee, osso "banned") has 147,664 hits today, of course not all are Singaporeans but how many of us would have seen it in the cinema? A few 100s or maybe 1000s? Sure not as may as in YouTube. Great job, censor board, thanks for letting me know this interesting movies exist!

Its so ridiculous altogether this world-class-censor joke, I wholeheartedly agree.

Oh, and I really like you little hint on too much complacency...


Desmond said...

Sounds like another s377a, "the law will be in the books but it will not be actively enforced".

Really, our laws are starting to become a joke. So it means that we should never take our laws seriously because (by these 2 examples) they are not actively enforced except drug offenders.

Anonymous said...

I totally agree that the Films Act has become totally irrelevant and ambiguous in this age of the Internet. So why still insist on the high moral grounds when in reality whatever they are censoring is easily available thru' the net.

The only reason for having it has to be political, ie. the fear of PAP being challenged by any opposition, whether real or imagined.

To insist that it is still relevant, why not ban the internet instead.

Absolutely brainless, our Government!

JF said...

Information on the documentary on J.B. Jeyaratnam

On January 4, 2002, a documentary on Jeyaretnam, entitled A Vision of Persistence, which showed Jeyaretnam, a former MP and erstwhile leader of the opposition Workers' Party, selling his books in public places and meeting with his supporters, was withdrawn from the Singapore International Film Festival on fears that it could have violated a law banning political films. The makers of the 15-minute documentary had submitted written apologies and withdrew it from being screened, after they were told that they could be charged in court. The film-makers, all lecturers at the Ngee Ann Polytechnic, had implausibly claimed that they had just chanced upon a man selling books on a street and decided to make a documentary on him, unaware at first that he was an opposition figure.

source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_Benjamin_Jeyaretnam

Anonymous said...

Timely the below appeared in ST today. Entirely ludicrous, I mean its a kiss (I haven't seen it and I am not at all lesbian, but I don't mind kisses)! Its not about sex and crime, its a KISS dam it.

Amazingly, I often see US series in Channel V where many people are killed in cruel ways, in the early evening program, this ok for kids to watch right?

Look at the logic of their argument:

"scenes of two girls kissing = the relationship deemed acceptable"

Cannot! Fine 10,000 $$$

So then it should follow:

"scene of one person killing another in a cruel way = behavior deemed acceptable"

Yes sure can! No fine.

What is the moral behind this logic?


April 9, 2008

SCV fined for airing lesbian kiss in music ad

STARHUB Cable Vision (SCV) has been fined $10,000 by the Media
Development Authority (MDA) for airing a commercial that showed lesbians
kissing, MDA said on its website.

The commercial, which aired in November, was to promote a song by
Mandarin pop singer Olivia Yan.

It was aired on MTV's Mandarin-language channel, MDA said.

'Within the commercial, romanticised scenes of two girls kissing were
shown and it portrayed the relationship as acceptable,' the statement

'This is in breach of the TV advertising guidelines, which disallows
advertisements that condone homosexuality.'

SCV expressed disappointment at the authority's decision to impose a
fine but said it would follow broadcasting rules.

'We understand the authority's concern, and will continue to work
closely with our regional and international content partners to ensure
that the local broadcasting guidelines are fully adhered to,' said Ms
Caitlin Fua, a StarHub spokesman. -- AP

Anonymous said...

A lot of in Singapore do not make sense(blowjob without vaginal penetration = crime); but more understanding you can get and less infuriating you will be if you think of Singapore as less of a country but more of a

2)Themepark (freakshow)
3)Corporation (family owned)
4)Prison(maximum security)
5)All of the above

Discard that sense of belonging. Reduce that unhealthy dose of patriotism. Take a vacation every August 9th. Deprogram your mind from National Education/Total Defence venom accumulated since your tender, impressionable years.

Then. You. Will. Be. Free.

Anonymous said...

what happens if everyone sends their videos on phonecams, youtubes and what have you for approval?

they HAVE to approve/disapprove it, since they are duty bound?