Update: Edits were made to clarify the fact that Breakfast Network does not yet fall under the new licensing rules. Therefore, it did not need to pay a performance bond.
This week, Breakfast Network, an up-and-coming Singapore news site, shut itself down because of the Media Development Authority’s (MDA) demands for the site to register or cease operations. In contrast, The Independent chose to comply after being given the same ultimatum.
These controversial measures, which occurred after new licensing requirements for online media sites were introduced by the government agency in May earlier this year without industry consultation, have been farcical.
While the requirement for news sites to register is not new, its uneven and high-handed implementation has created a cloud of uncertainty that is impeding the country’s media entrepreneurs in ways that aren’t justified on closer scrutiny.
Head in the sand?
In the first place, it hasn’t convincingly communicated any good reason to implement the new framework or heighten enforcement of the existing regime.
Explaining the new rules, MDA says that it wants to bring new media sites in line with regulations governing traditional news channels by requiring websites with over 50,000 local visitors to get licenses.
The goal is to prevent foreign interests from influencing local politics by making media companies declare that they have not received foreign funding. Nonetheless, ad buys from overseas are allowed.
These justifications are in line with the existing Class Licensing Scheme, which was exercised on Breakfast Network because MDA, in an email to Tech in Asia, says that it has “assessed that as a corporate entity providing political commentary and news, [Breakfast Network] may be susceptible to foreign influence by way of foreign funding.”
These rules might make sense in the 80s, where local print and broadcast media are the predominant source of news. That has changed since, with the internet and social media disrupting how news is distributed and consumed.
For example, in the recent Little India riot, foreign news media has jumped on it, and there’s nothing stopping them from influencing local politics despite being based abroad.
MDA’s obsession with harmful foreign influence also deserves further scrutiny. We should be more concerned about the United States’ attempt to bulldoze over the intellectual property segment of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement than a hypothetical foreign firm owning a stake in a local news site, which may have negligible impact on content.
And if foreign influence is such a concern, why not limit foreign ownership to say 49 percent, or create a framework shareholder agreement that gives local shareholders and journalists ultimate say in news operations no matter how much equity they own?
Entrepreneurs have enough to worry about
Despite repeated clarifications, MDA has not offered much clarity on how it plans to implement the scheme and how it determines which site qualifies.
Self-sabotage
Stay updated on the go with our mobile app.
Get latest insights with smoother, more personalized experience through TIA mobile app.
