‘Strong’ response against deliberate online falsehoods needed to safeguard national security and sovereignty

SINGAPORE — Highlighting the seriousness of the threat of online falsehoods, the Select Committee studying the issue called for a "strong" governmental and societal response to safeguard national security and sovereignty.

"(Agents) are able to translate their online falsehoods and the manipulation of misinformation into real-world consequences – rallies and protests pitting people against each other," said a committee member, Senior Minister of State for Communications and Information Janil Puthucheary.

"These…problems can creep up on us unnoticed until it is too late, and (have) serious consequences."

Dr Puthucheary, who is also Senior Minister of State for Transport, also justified the need for "strong measures" to tackle the issue.

"We believe that – on the basis of the information provided to us – the nature of falsehoods, and especially deliberate online falsehoods… means that they have an upper hand over the facts.

"They are more reasonably believed, they travel further, they travel faster, and they are much harder to dislodge. We need measures that have the same degree of strength to counter the asymmetry that exists between the falsehood and truth that is out there," Dr Puthucheary said at a press conference.

On Thursday (Sept 20), the 10-member Select Committee recommended 22 measures to counter what it deemed a "live and serious threat" of weaponisation of fake news. The measures include a "national-level strategy and coordinated approach" to deal with state-sponsored disinformation operations.

The committee stressed the need to effectively deal with threats to national security and sovereignty.

Perpetrators "may be motivated by politics, prejudice or ideology", it noted. "Individuals both local and foreign may also be motivated by profit, mischief or social connection," it said.

Legislation "cannot be a silver bullet by itself", but it is needed to effectively disrupt the spread and influence of falsehoods, it noted.

Measures such as beefing up public education are important, but are insufficient to deal with the speed and reach of online falsehoods perpetuated on social media platforms, said the committee.

Committee member and opposition leader Pritam Singh spoke of the need for "calibrated" measures.

Mr Singh, who is also Member of Parliament for Aljunied GRC, said: "There's a whole suite of options that ought to be available for the Government, and the Government ought to avail itself to these options … so that there is a balance."

Meanwhile, Nominated Member of Parliament Chia Yong Yong said that beyond the legislation and framework that the committee recommends, it was vital that Singaporeans understand the significance of the issues.

Ms Chia said: "If there is no understanding of the impact of deliberate disinformation, there is no incentive on the part of any individual to (take any) action to think critically, verify facts."

"It is only when we have this mindset, and this ability to own the problem collectively, that we would then be able to have all the measures that the committee has recommended work.

"Otherwise, it will be nothing more than frameworks, rules, schemes, and this will not achieve what we need to achieve," Ms Chia added.

Responding on Thursday evening, the Government said it acknowledges the committee's findings on the "serious challenges and real risks" posed by deliberate online falsehoods, "including how online falsehoods can harm national security and undermine a nation's sovereignty".

Accepting the recommendations in-principle, the Government said such falsehoods "could affect a country's social cohesion, incite public unrest and violence, and cause undue public alarm.

"The committee has made clear that Singapore is not immune to this grave threat," it added.

The Select Committee was chaired by Deputy Speaker of Parliament Charles Chong. Members included Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam and Senior Minister of State (Law and Health) Edwin Tong.

It received 170 written representations and heard oral evidence from 65 individuals and organisations over 50 hours during eight days of public hearings held earlier this year.