Tuesday, May 5, 2009

The Internet History in Pictures

Tuesday, May 5, 2009

Happy 40th Birthday - The Internet History in Pictures


This year marks the 40th anniversary of the various technologies that led to the creation of the internet and revolutionised the way we live - from our work time to our play time.

On the evening of October 29, at about 10:30pm, scientists watched as the first successful connection was made between computers at Stanford University, in Silicon Valley, and UCLA about 400km away in Los Angeles.

The first message transmitted over the network was meant to be "login", but the connection crashed after two keystrokes – so the first official transmission was the message "lo".

Thanks to news.com, here is a brief history of the net and technologies over the last 40-years in pictures...

___________________________________________________________




1968 — Network it out

The US military already had one-to-one computer connections, but it needed a system that would connect many. In 1968, Robert Taylor from DARPA and Larry Roberts from MIT led a project to create an interconnected network known as ARPANET, which — little did they know at the time — would essentially define the way the internet would work for decades to come.


1969 — Lo, ARPANET is born

Late at night on October 29, 1969, a computer in UCLA and one in Stanford were connected through ARPANET. The first message was fairly unceremonious — it was meant to be "login", but the system crashed on the third keystroke. So the first message was, officially, "lo".


1971 — @ war

Before betamax, before browsers, there were the email header wars. While electronic mail had existed in some form since 1965, Ray Tomlinson set up a new version using the @ symbol. Since every other system was using a different form of address, this sparked off the "email header wars". Guess which one won?


Mid-1970s — Buckingham trends

Always one to keep up with the times, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth 2 sent an email to show she was down with the digital generation. These days she's making YouTube videos. What next — royal mashups?


1979 — Social networking

USENET began as the 1970s were fading away, offering a new type of network that was less academic and more social.


1982 — Emotional times

In 1982, the term "internet" was first used to describe the computer networking system. It must have been an emotional year, because at the same time, emoticons emerged on USENET. :)


1983 — United in binary

After decades of divide between various computer networks around the world, scientists created one protocol to unite them all. Computer scientists Vint Cerf and Robert Caillau brought the virtual islands together using TCP/IP, a protocol that still rules the internet today.


1984 — Jacked in

Novelist and tech visionary William Gibson coined the term "cyberspace". That same year, Japan got its national network JUNET. Purely coincidental, of course...


1988 — The worm turns

The first computer worm spread through networks around the world. While it was not malicious, it was shocking enough to prompt the formation of the Computer Emergency Response Team, which still battles serious worms and viruses today.


1989 — C'mon Aussie

Australia's own network began with the Australian Academic Research Network (AARNET). That same year, a young computer scientist named Tim Berners-Lee sent a document around European science organisation CERN, outlining his vision of a hyperlinked internet interface.



Your Ad Here



1990 — What web?

Tim Berners-Lee got the go-ahead to build his vision of the world wide web. The problem was it initially existed only on CERN's computer — and no-one else in the world had a browser to view these webpages. Development continued for a few years, gaining publicity and momentum until finally more browsers were released for the public to see this new world


1994 — Blast off

In this year, the web went mainstream as consumers got the Mosaic web browser and the W3C consortium was formed to bring order to how it was developed. CERN decided to let the project grow on its own and chose to focus instead on its next big thing (literally) — the Large Hadron Collider


Mid-1990s — Browser wars

In 1994 a new web browser based on Mosaic called Netscape Navigator was released and became the program most people used to surf the web. When Microsoft introduced Internet Explorer the following year, the two companies became locked in a battle for supremacy known as the "browser wars".


1998 — United States vs. Microsoft

The browser wars were effectively settled after Microsoft began packaging Internet Explorer with its Windows operating system, making it the default choice for all Windows users. However the move led to the famous antitrust case of 1998, when the US Department of Justice sued the company for anticompetitive behaviour.


1999 — Dot com boom

Since the mid-1990s, momentum had been building in the dot-com industry. As the bubble neared its peak in 1999, many established companies were looking to invest in new online ventures and countless start-ups were vying for their interest. Hundreds of millions of dollars were spent buying or promoting new websites.


2000 — Dot com bust

In March and April 2000 the bubble burst, leaving countless dot-coms to become "dot bombs". As investment cash dried up, many start-ups found themselves without any revenue at all because they hadn't started to turn a profit. A few of the bigger players, including eBay and Amazon, weathered the storm.


2001 — Music industry vs. Napster

Even if the cash was drained from the web industry, that didn't stop innovation in other areas of the internet. File-sharing service Napster let users transfer songs and videos between each other and foreshadowed today's BitTorrent programs. It was shut down in 2001 after a law suit from the recording industry.


2004 — Web 2.0

"Web 2.0" isn't actually a real thing — it's just the name given to the next big wave of web development that took place after the dot com boom and bust, beginning in 2004. Many of the sites of this period, such as YouTube, Flickr, and Digg, have familiar characteristics, like letting users create their own content or interact with each other.


2009 — The Pirate Bay sunk?

Eight years after Napster was taken offline, four men associated with the BitTorrent file-sharing website The Pirate Bay were convicted of being accessories to breaching copyright law, marking a new point in the battle between copyright holders and "pirates". The website, which bills itself as the largest of its type in the world, still hasn't been taken offline though.


2009 — Into the future

In the year of the 40th anniversary of the breakthroughs behind the internet, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has announced the largest infrastructure project in Australian history to build a fibre-optic broadband network that will offer speeds of up to 100 times available today, and one of the pioneers of TCP/IP, Vint Cerf, is working on a design for an interplanetary internet in outer space. What will we see next?

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28498.1

Singapore inching up press freedom chart with Gabon

Singapore inching up press freedom chart with Gabon

Slowly but surely Singapore is moving up the global press freedom chart, advancing two places this year.

Singapore is ranked 151st out of 195 countries in the 2009 Freedom of the Press rankings by Freedom House.

Also ranked 151st are Gabon and Armenia.

This is the third year in a row Singapore has tied with Gabon. Both were ranked 153rd in 2008 and 154th in 2007.

Iraq, which was ranked 153rd last year with Singapore and Gabon, has now moved up to 148th.

* Three Southeast Asian nations are ranked lower than Singapore -- Brunei (163rd, up from 165th), Vietnam (178th, no change) and Burma (194th, unchanged).
* Malaysia has dropped from 141st last year to 143rd this year.
* Hong Kong is down from 67th from 75th.
* India has moved up from 77th to 76th.
* North Korea ranks last.
* China is 181st with Iran and Rwanda.
* Topping the list is Iceland, busted by the financial crisis. (Give me Singapore, which has good leadership and substantial reserves to weather the recession.)
* Also in the top 10 are Finland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, Luxembourg, Andorra, the Netherlands and Switzerland.
* New Zealand ranks 11th with Liechtenstein and Palau.
* America is 24th with the Czech Republic and Lithuania.
* Britain is 27th with Canada, Costa Rica, Barbados and St Kitts and Nevis.
* Japan is 33rd with Austria, Hungary, Belize and Micronesia.
* Australia is 38th with France, Cyprus, Malta and Dominica.
* Taiwan is 43rd with Latvia, Slovakia, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago and Vanuatu.
* South Korea is 66th with South Africa, Namibia, Guyana and Solomon Islands.


http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28494.1

Aware saga spawns T-shirt

May 5, 2009
AWARE SAGA
Aware saga spawns T-shirt
By Felicia Wong
Ms Vicki Lew conjured up a design using the now-infamous quote 'Shut up and sit down' while following the Twitter feed as the Aware EOGM took place. -- PHOTO: COURTESY OF VICKI LEW
AS 3,000 people packed the Association of Women and Research (Aware)'s Extraordinary General Meeting (EOGM) last Saturday, Vicki Lew, 29, followed the unfolding drama via a live feed on social networking site Twitter.

She had signed up as an Aware member earlier last week so that she could vote in a no-confidence motion against the 'new guard' led by then-President Josie Lau, but came down with a bad stomach flu and was unable to attend the showdown.

At one point during the raucous meeting, former exco member Sally Ang shouted at the jeering audience to 'shut up and sit down'. The outburst got the Twitter stream #awaresg abuzz, and one netizen jested that the phrase would look great on a t-shirt.

That immediately sparked Ms Lew to conjure up a design using the now-infamous quote 'just for fun'. In 30 minutes, the design consultant with nine years of experience shared a mock-up with 'followers' of the Twitter feed, who responded positively to the prototype.

As emotions ran high and more barbs were traded between the 'new guard' and supporters of the 'old guard', the feisty exchanges provided many more quote-worthy jibes.

Still following the Twitter feed, Ms Lew drew inspiration from these juicy tidbits and came up with four designs by the time the seven-hour marathon EGM ended past 9pm. Buoyed by the positive feedback from netizens, Ms Lew uploaded some of these designs onto a US-based t-shirt printing site and quickly garnered about 30 orders, she told straitstimes.com on Tuesday.

'But using a US site meant that the t-shirts were expensive and then there's the high cost of shipping,' said Ms Lew, who then managed to get in touch with friend who ran a printing business and could also produce the t-shirts. 'We want to support local businesses, and also keep costs down,' she explained.

By 4am on Sunday morning, the t-shirts were ready for sale via a Singapore site. Since then, more than 150 t-shirts (retailed at $29.90), have been sold, with the original 'Shut up and sit down' t-shirt being the most popular. At last count, the next most popular item was the 'I'm on page 73' t-shirt, referring to self-declared 'feminist mentor' Dr Thio Su Mien's quote about the page number of an Aware publication on which she was featured.

Ms Lew attributed the surging t-shirt sales to social networking sites like Twitter and Facebook, where news of the t-shirts have 'totally gone viral' since the initial designs were uploaded on Sunday. While not sold on the actual Aware website, Ms Lew said that the newly-elected exco 'have been supportive' of the t-shirts, with talk to link the t-shirt sale site to the we-are-aware.sg site used by the 'old guard'.

Describing herself as someone who was actually 'not very vocal', Ms Lew initially felt that the Aware saga had nothing to do with her. However, as she followed the saga, she said the takeover launched by the 'new guard' exco 'got her thinking' about broader issues. 'I wouldn't have these rights, these luxuries, if someone did not fight for them,' she said, referring to the advances in women's rights. 'After this, it really showed me that I have to say something if things are not right,' she added.

For now, Ms Lew is walking the talk by donating 70 per cent of proceeds from the t-shirt sales to Aware. 'After the $90,000 that the exco spent, they really need it,' she quipped, referring to the amount spent by the Josie Lau-led exco in just one month.

Meanwhile, the sales site is collecting orders and will be printing the t-shirts in batches for cost-effectiveness. Ms Lew also intends to gift these t-shirts to the newly-elected exco members once they have have been printed.


http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.84

AWARE debate still raging in cyberspace

AWARE debate still raging in cyberspace
By Esther Ng, TODAY | Posted: 05 May 2009 1342 hrs

Photos 1 of 1 > " onclick="Next();" src="http://www.channelnewsasia.com/images/butt_next.gif" type="image" width="18" height="15">

A dejected supporter of Josie Lau's team reacting to the results
Special Report
AWARE Dispute

SINGAPORE : Over the past month, the AWARE saga has spawned a fringe festival of views and petitions on various blogs and Internet discussion boards, including the Government’s feedback portal.

The Reach portal has received about 50 postings about AWARE’s Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE) programme, most of them critical.

Many of the postings take issue with statements from AWARE’s guide for trainers, such as “anal sex — can be healthy and neutral if practised with consent and with a condom” and “homosexuality is perfectly normal”. One parent asked: “What is going on in our society? ... It is so perverted. Is Singapore going down this slippery road as well?”

Another forum contributor, what_aware_show_your_kids, questioned how the Ministry of Education (MOE) could view the AWARE course as “promoting pro-family values in young kids”.

On April 29, the MOE said that it had not received any objections from parents about AWARE’s CSE programme. Many parents took issue with this statement, saying that the fact there had not been any complaints did not mean Aware’s content was appropriate.

One irate parent wrote: “MOE better uphold what it preaches — that it observes and value good morals as taught by the major religions here — that homosexuality has no place in early teens’ minds.”

Last Friday, the MOE announced it was investigating AWARE’s sexuality education programme run in some schools after receiving “some” complaints from parents.

Apart from homosexuality, the manual’s statement on premarital sex being “neutral” also upset some. “They encourage girls to carry condoms with them, for what? To avoid pregnancy? To avoid abortion? Or is it to encourage sex?” wrote Wrong Stuff. “In the first place, the correct approach is to avoid sex. Sex before marriage is wrong.”

A few congratulated Ms Josie Lau and her team for “standing up against homosexual values”. Despite the team being voted out last Saturday, they agreed that the short-lived new AWARE exco had achieved its objective of highlighting issues within CSE programme.

They were interested to know “how MOE and parents can engage to develop a comprehensive sex education programme for schools which reflects the mainstream views and values of Singapore society”.

So, what will Reach do with all this feedback that it has received?

Reach chairman Amy Khor told TODAY that when “substantial feedback is received on a particular issue, Reach will collate and send the feedback in a timely manner to the relevant ministries” to respond and for “follow-up action where they deem appropriate”.

Ms Khor noted that while the posts about the AWARE issue, over three separate discussion threads, were emotive, there were no racially and religiously offensive comments.

“Reach did not remove any of the AWARE threads on our discussion forum. As a norm, we will only delete comments which are clearly meant to create mischief, seditious, personal attacks or attacks against a race or religion,” said Dr Khor. -
TODAY/ra

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.83

A Coming of Age of Civil Society

A Coming of Age of Civil Society
By Loh Chee Kong, TODAY | Posted: 05 May 2009 1340 hrs

Photos 1 of 1 > " onclick="Next();" src="http://www.channelnewsasia.com/images/butt_next.gif" type="image" width="18" height="15">


SINGAPORE: AWARE’S extraordinary general meeting (EGM) last Saturday, which was attended by a 3,000-strong crowd of mainly women, was more than just a show of “girl power”.

It was a demonstration of how civil society, without the Government’s overt hand, can handle controversial debates on sensitive issues — and they do not come more explosive than the cocktail of religion and sexuality that dominated the saga.

Yes, the month-long public debate got ugly at times — there is absolutely no space for death threats — and the booing and heckling of speakers at the EGM were regrettable.

But as several observers pointed out, there were more positives than negatives - not least a coming of age for civil society.

The Aware saga dispelled the notion that some topics are taboo in Singapore — that differences are best discussed behind closed doors, in hushed tones, or worse, swept under the carpet.

Straits Times journalist Janadas Devan asserted in an article yesterday that the episode showed why OB (out-of-bounds) markers are necessary.

On the contrary, the women of Aware have shown that Singaporeans are capable of not only passionately fighting for their views, but also knowing when to back down. This was, perhaps, because the Government, to its credit, stayed largely out of the picture.

The last time homosexuality and religion took centrestage in public was in 2007 during the debate on Section 377A of the Penal Code which criminalises homosexual acts.

If the heated debate then was anything to go by, few would have been surprised if the Government had stepped in once religious overtones seeped into the Aware saga.

Yet, apart from a few gentle but firm reminders for the opposing camps not to push their views too aggressively, the Government’s most pointed comments came only on the eve of the EGM, with Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng stressing the “need for tolerance and restraint by all groups”.

Mr Wong’s comments came after the National Council of Churches of Singapore (NCCS) issued a public statement distancing the churches from the saga and a public apology from pastor Derek Hong for using the pulpit to campaign for the erstwhile Exco.

Other than Mr Wong’s comments, the only other visible intervention by the Government was by the police advising Singapore Expo against allowing the EGM to be held there. With a large Christian conference taking place at the same time, it could have been an ugly affair.

Apart from the statement and apology, veteran journalist P N Balji pointed to at least one other development which may have helped stave off direct, and public, intervention by the Government: Dr Thio Su Mien going public over her role and the motivations of the Exco.

Still, Institute of South-east Asian Studies research fellow Terence Chong felt that the Government was always prepared to step in if the debate turned “too dangerous”.

In this case, he noted, the debate was framed more as a contest between the Old Guard’s inclusive approach and the New Guard’s “exclusive” stance towards homosexuals. “Maturity prevailed ... people were quite passionate but it didn’t boil over into an exclusively religious debate,” said the research fellow.

So, could the Aware saga prove to be a watershed for public discourse of taboo topics?

Said Dr Chong: “I hesitate to use the term ‘watershed’ — it was more of an evolutionary process of civil society.” -
TODAY/ra

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28274.124


Exposed: The missing hour after Aware new exco received no-confidence vote

Exposed: The missing hour after Aware new exco received no-confidence vote
What happened during the hour that the new Exco went missing during the Aware Extraordinary Meeting on Saturday?

They went missing for an hour after they lost the vote of confidence and were asked by the old guard to step down.

Well, an anonymous creative person ventured an answer by using a Rambo movie as a parody.

The video was sent to us by Stomper Everyman, who praised the sense of humour that Singaporeans have -- plus our creativity, a facet of Singaporeans that is not always recognised.

The text accompanying the video says this: "A very emotional clip. Not for the faint hearted.

"During the Aware EGM, when the new exco lost the vote and were asked to step down by the old guards, they went missing for an hour to decide on their destiny.

"What happened during that hour? This video provides the answer."

Here we carry excerpts of the video.

CLICK FOR LARGER IMAGE:

Video spoof of the missing hour during Aware EGM

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28274.123

Aware: OLD GUARD SAY VOLUNTEERS HELPED THEM TO VICTORY

Aware Showdown

OLD GUARD SAY VOLUNTEERS HELPED THEM TO VICTORY

'Whatever you can think of, they did'
By Benson Ang
May 05, 2009 Print Ready Email Article

ON SATURDAY, Ms Alex Serrenti, 35, got up at 5.15am, jumped on her motorcycle and rode to Suntec City.
Click to see larger image
DEDICATED: Volunteer Alex Serenti got up at 5.15am to 'warm' seats at an event that was to start only seven hours later. TNP PICTURES: NG XI JIE, KELVIN CHNG

She had a mission - she was there to 'warm' seats for someone at an event that was to start only seven hours later.

The teaching assistant was one of about 100 'white-shirt' volunteers on the side of the former leadership of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) at its extraordinary general meeting (EGM) on Saturday.

They offered their services as legal advisors, social workers, seat-warmers, crowd-controllers, caterers, and even bodyguards for the old guard if the situation got out of hand.

These volunteers were the muscle behind the dramatic victory of the old guard, who wrestled back control of the feminist orgnisation from a group who had ousted them earlier this year.

The old guard did so by successfully passing a vote of no confidence in the new leaders, who then resigned.

Roughly two-thirds of the members at the EGM voted for the no-confidence motion.

Most of these volunteers were friends of the old guard, or concerned members of the public. Some were men.

Through their personal networks, they also called on others to chip in.

Amazing

Click to see larger image
LEGAL BEAGLES: The old guards legal team, with Ms SIngam (in green). They are (clockwise from bottom left) Ms Halijah Mohamad, Mr Mark Goh, and Mr Siew Hum Hong. TNP PICTURE: BENSON ANG

Said veteran member Braema Mathi, 51: 'The seat-warmers struck me the most. That kind of dedication... they were amazing.'

She added: 'It's a defining moment that people are willing to give so much of their time to do this type of job.'

She added that she felt there was so much goodwill around because people wanted to protect the secular state of Aware.

With fellow teaching assistant Ms Kamalini Ramdas, 36, Ms Serrenti headed the logistics team inside the auditorium.

By turning up early, she made sure that the old guard speakers had seats next to the microphones, and could speak easily.

When she was allowed to start queuing around 11am, she and 40 other seat-warmers were first in line.

During the meeting, Ms Serrenti was also actively involved in crowd-control, and tried to calm down the old guard supporters for the meeting to progress.

She was so busy that she did not have lunch, and only had dinner around 10pm, after the meeting was over.

Click to see larger image

Said Ms Serrenti: 'It was never about us. It's our responsibility to ensure safety for everyone.

'Some of the old guard have spent their lives fighting for Aware. It would not have been fair if the logistics stopped them from defending their organisation.'

Although Ms Serrenti was in the final stages of her PhD, she said she 'couldn't not do anything' because she had supported several students to go for Aware's counselling services before, and was afraid these services would be affected under the new guard.

She had been an Aware member in 2001, but had let her membership lapse.

Click to see larger image
Ms Singam.

She claimed their team initially sent letters to the new guard seeking to co-ordinate the logistics in the auditorium together, but the latter was unresponsive.

It was then that their team thought of safety measures on their own.

Volunteers like her had been planning for about three weeks, meeting at the Women's Initiative for Ageing Successfully, a venue they arranged through a founding member of Aware, Dr Kanwaljit Soin.

Money was tight - the old guard had only $10,000, from two anonymous donors.

Most of it was spent renting out the restaurant New York, New York for a day, so the old guard could have a place to organise themselves, and hold a press conference if their no-confidence vote failed.

When asked about the volunteers, newly-elected Aware president Dana Lam-Teo, 56, a writer, smiled.

She said: 'They have given us the kind of quality service that no money can buy.'

She had never seen the We Are Aware website updated so speedily, and felt very supported because everything else was taken care of.

'Whatever you can think of, they did,' she said. 'We had better organisation than the F1, I would imagine!'


What the volunteers did

Before the meeting:

  • Designed white T-shirts in support of the old guard.

  • Updated the website (www.we-are-aware.sg).

  • Released two YouTube videos campaigning for the old guard - one featuring various women calling for support, and another an interview with Ms Dana Lam, who was eventually elected president.

  • Prepared an information pack for voters, and a sign for them to hold up.

  • Arrived at the venue at 7.30am to fill the seats, and ensure that key speakers from the old guard could sit close to the microphones.

  • Greeted each voter, and gave out the information pack and a badge, a piece of styrofoam in the shape of a heart.

  • Bought and distributed flowers to their supporters.

  • Prepared to negotiate with the event organisers if there were disputes with voters' memberships.

  • Borrowed loud hailers, and supplied publicity materials.

  • Recced each of the three venues which the EGM was slated to be held in.

    During the meeting

  • Sent out SMSes to voters' mobile phones with instructions such as 'Stay Calm Be Dignified' and on how to fill in the voting forms.

  • Scrutinised the counting of the votes with the audit firm.

  • Calmed down passionate old guard supporters so the meeting could progress.

  • Kept a look out for people who appeared too upset, and guided them outside, where volunteer social workers were ready to provide counselling.

  • Supplied the audience with spring rolls, mini-sandwiches, fish fingers, onion rings, apples and water when the meeting dragged on.

    Contingency plan

  • Escorted the key old guard speakers, and in case a fight broke out, were ready to act as bodyguards.
  • http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28274.121

    Reducing train frequency because of H1N1? That’s ridiculous!

    Reducing train frequency because of H1N1? That’s ridiculous!

    According to CNA, SMRT said train frequency will be reduced by 30% once Singapore’s pandemic alert level hits red. This is because its service staff are divided into two teams to prevent the potential spread of the H1N1 virus.

    This is the most ridiculous excuse I’ve heard to reduce train frequency! Does SMRT realise what’s going to happen if train frequency is reduced by 30%? Crowds will swell on the platforms and stations, and the trains will be packed even fuller with people (as if they aren’t already). That would surely be a formula for an even more rapid spread of the flu, should anyone of the 8 persons per square metre of train space happen to sneeze or cough.

    I know many organisations, particularly government and government-linked ones, have plans to divide into two teams if the situation gets severe, but this is not something that essential services companies should do — or at least it should not affect their operations to such an extent.

    Do you hear of Singapore Power, PUB and the police telling us that our electricity, water and security forces will be cut by 30% if the alert level hits red?

    Nice try at cost-cutting, SMRT.

    http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28408.1

    A tale of two communities

    A tale of two communities

    In a society as diverse as ours, restraint, tolerance should be order of the day

    Tuesday • May 5, 2009

    Simon Tay

    THE clash of different interest groups in Aware has made headlines in recent weeks, perhaps too many. With the outcome of the weekend’s extraordinary general meeting now known, attention is likely to shift elsewhere.

    But there are things to observe from this controversy that should be drawn not only for those directly involved. This is not an isolated incident, nor one that tells us that citizens are doomed to clash loudly and angrily. The lessons that can be learnt pertain to our civil society and how governance evolves.

    Vertical and Horizontal Societies

    The Aware saga shows that citizens now relate to each other directly and not only to the government. Singapore is no longer a vertical society, but one with horizontal links.

    In a vertical society, citizens link only to the government. From the early years of Singapore, and even today, our political leaders have exhorted citizens on the full range of issues, like littering and having more children if we can afford it, so much so that it becomes part of the national agenda.

    Even when the politics of consultation evolved under former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong, we remained a vertical society. Consultation simply meant dialogue between the Government and citizens became more of a two-way street.

    A horizontal society is one where citizens form different groups that express their own interests and beliefs and act independently of the government.

    Issues are handled within and between these groups, with less reference and deference to the government, especially on personal or moral issues. The government’s role can then be cut back to refocus on core national issues like security.

    A civil society can provide more space for citizens to be active and contribute. But it is not idyllic. There can be differences between groups that lead to conflict, which may lead to the kind of electoral battles seen in the Aware saga. There can even be violent clashes between rival camps.

    However, horizontal society is not necessarily fraught with conflict and therefore to be avoided. Civil society groups can and do work together for mutual benefit.

    Take for instance, the arts community. While headlines focused on the Aware clash, our arts community came together to select their representatives for consideration to be a Nominated Member of Parliament.

    The arts community is not without its differences. But these were put aside for a common and higher goal — to ensure that artistic causes receive better representation in Parliament. There are other examples where civil society groups cooperate.

    Communities of Interests

    But why do some groups clash? Different viewpoints are only part of the reason. After all, differences can be discussed and understanding — rather than conflict — can result. This is an essential tenet of democracy.

    This is a second lesson to be drawn from the Aware episode. While the matter was settled constitutionally, by voting, this is a bare legality. Democracy must involve more than the capture of power by votes. Otherwise, both sides only learn the habits of organising for power, rather than of accommodation and discussion. Knowing that differences exist, groups of citizens should increase the tolerance for, and acceptance of differences.

    But some groups may press for others to be assimilated to their views and seek to oppose or suborn them. This is a third observation we can draw from the Aware case, in which individuals from a church came together because of accusations (subsequently refuted) that Aware promotes gay and lesbian causes.

    They could have campaigned against Aware, started their own group or complained to the relevant ministry. Instead, their instinct, as promoted by self-described “Feminist Mentor” Thio Su Mien, was to take over Aware. Can one imagine the reverse? That someone who disagreed with the teachings of a religious group try to take over that group?

    The attitude of most secular groups is to leave religion alone. We must hope conversely that religious groups — however much they believe in their positions — should also respect the rights of other secular groups.

    This does not mean secular groups must be devoid of religious sentiment. Belief can drive individuals to work for charities, even if those charities are secular. But a line has to be drawn and observed. The more fervent religious groups become in our society, the more we should try to respect that line.

    Governing Diversity

    What if different groups clash? While Singapore is developing a horizontal dimension, the vertical axis of government has a role to play in governing diverse groups.

    While eschewing liberal democracy, the government has evolved a degree of acceptance for citizen groups. From the early 1990s, Foreign Minister George Yeo elegantly explored this theme, even if he preferred the more conservative term of “civic” society. The Singapore 21 consultation, then chaired by Mr Teo Chee Hean, now Deputy Prime Minister, also explored the emergence of a people sector.

    Re-reading ministerial statements on civil society explains why and how the Government acted in the Aware episode, or ways in which it refused to arbitrate on the matter.

    It is not that Government leaders support Aware’s agenda under the Old Guard. Indeed, it is more likely that a number would personally have sympathy for groups that espouse conservative values in sexuality, gays and lesbians. The People’s Action Party’s leadership seems to recognise that they should not ask whether they personally agree with a view put forward by a group. No political leader offered his or her moral preference.

    Instead, the Aware episode seems to suggest that the Government will set out broader parameters of acceptable behaviour. So long as they keep within those boundaries and do not threaten safety or public order, the prevailing attitude is to refrain from interceding as much as possible. If they have to intercede, they seem careful to act with restraint and fairness.

    Going forward, the Government would do well to remain watchful but not anxious about most citizen’s groups.

    Singapore society is becoming more complex. Civil society and interest and voluntary groups and associations have become more active. So have organised religious groups. Differences are inevitable.

    But conflicts can be managed and clashes avoided. If not, groups run the danger of Government intervention or worse, increased distrust and disinterest of average citizens in their cause.

    The preferred means for managing conflicts and avoiding clashes between civil society groups should not be the vertical strong arm of the Government. Nor even the test of strength and numbers by one group acting against another.

    We can hope and expect that groups that emerge in civil society will depend first on their self-restraint. This should be borne out of a respect of diversity and a broad appreciation of the rights of others to their own opinions, even if — in their eyes — others do not have the right views.

    Simon S C Tay is chairman of the Singapore Institute of International Affairs and was a committee member of Singapore 21 when he was a Nominated Member of Parliament.

    http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.180

    Aware: Abusing professional integrity

    Abusing professional integrity

    Yeo Toon Joo, an ex senior journalist, wrote a passionate article on the role of journalists and the media during the recent national crisis when two women groups fought for leadership in Aware. Details are in www.littlespeck.com. I can understand his disgust and anger over the state of journalism here. We have perhaps the best crop of talented reporters and journalists schooled in the best universities and returned with first class honours degrees. With such able and capable talents, it is a big waste if they are not assigned to cover more meaty and worthy news than the Aware catfight. OK, I accept that this catfight may be an issue of national proportion to some. But I have my reservation on the importance of this, as Vivian has described it most appropriately, 'petty politics'.

    Looking across the professions, such abuses of professionalism are quite prevalent and did great harm to the professions as well as the integrity and self worth of the professionals. Many could even compromise their moral principles to deal with things that they should not be doing as an honourable individual.

    I don't see any pride if the whole system and machinery are harnessed to chase children wearing T shirts screaming, 'Shut up and sit down'. I don't find it funny if senior management were to take buses just to prove that the transport claim put up by his/her subordinate is $1.10 and not $1.20. I don't find it funny if nonsensical reasons were given to justify nonsensical decisions. We have not gone down this road yet. But it will be a very sad day if such things happened. I feel terribly sorry for the professionals if they were to compromise themselves and their professional integrity to do the unsavoury.

    I am waiting for the day when talented journalists and reporters were assigned to write about gossips of aunties and uncles, about who is sleeping with who, who wears what and eats what, or who did not brush teeth. Would that day come?

    If it does, it would be the reason why our journalists are unable to excel in what they do, unable to optimise their talents in creative and investigative writings on real substance and issues of great importance. But I may be wrong, as what is important or not is just a subjective personal interpretation.

    http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28520.3

    AWARE: A triumph for women...

    May 5, 2009
    AWARE: REVELATIONS
    A triumph for women...
    The new exco members from the old guard - (back row from left) Tan Joo Hymn, Hafizah Osman, Chew I-Jin, Constance Singam, Nancy Griffiths, Nicole Tan, Martha Lee and Margaret Thomas, and (front row from left) Yap Ching Wi, Lim Seow Yuin, Joanna D'Cruz and president Dana Lam. -- ST FILE PHOTO

    I USED to think that Singapore women were apathetic. Saturday's extraordinary general meeting of the Association of Women for Action and Research (Aware) showed me otherwise. Women wore T-shirts and badges declaring their support, and waved cards in the air that said 'For all women, trust, respect, choice'. It was the best $40 I spent on membership - and a place at the meeting - never mind the current economic situation and the upcoming Great Singapore Sale.

    The spirit exuding from the women was worth it all. I learnt that non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are run differently from companies. NGOs run on goodwill and volunteers are valued assets who should never be let go. Consequently, such a society's leadership is powered from bottom-up, instead of top-down.

    Also, NGOs talk about profit differently. In a company, profit is total income minus total cost. In an NGO, it is cost minimisation at all times because money can always be used to 'profit' someone in need.

    Also gratifying was the debunking of the cliche that Singaporeans judge each other by paper qualifications. A lesser academically qualified member of Aware with a proven record for passionate advocacy is valued more that a better-qualified one without it. So, even highly paper-qualified fresh faces without prior experience need to be humble to learn from more experienced but possibly less paper-qualified ones.

    Ho Anqi (Ms)

    http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=28024.59