# data[].attributes.body
Judas -lady gaga song

Year:2011

Seen as a provocative for its use of christian religious imagery and themes

Temporary Banned Media Development Authority (MDA) Due to concern they might offend religious sensitivities

# data[].attributes.body
Puff - the Magic Dragon

Year: 1963

Seen as it was referred marijuana

albums: Velvet Rope and All For You - Janet Jackson

Banned due to homosexual and sexually explicit themes that the BPAA found ‘not acceptable to our society.’

# data[].attributes.body
1) Netflix is censored in Singapore

In 2018, Netflix complied with the Singapore Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) to remove Cooking on High, The Legend of 420, and Disjointed from the service in Singapore only.

# data[].attributes.body
Censorship of smoking from a mural with a samsui woman

(https://www.reddit.com/r/ArtHistory/s/spWetbWEt2)

Censorship of bullying

(https://www.reddit.com/r/SingaporeRaw/s/fwFrzsohcN)

Censorship of movies because of LGBT scene

(https://www.reddit.com/r/singapore/s/iDhtCOehwR)

# data[].attributes.body
In 2005, the MDA withheld the licence for the play Human Lefts by Benny Lim and Brian Gothong Tan unless some scenes were edited and all references to the death penalty removed. The play was originally written about the hanging of Shanmugam Murugesu and was to have been staged one day after the controversial execution of Australian national Nguyen Tuong Van.

# data[].attributes.body
Possessing Jehovah Witnesses literature is illegal in Singapore, which can elicit fines and jail time if convicted. Even being a Jehovah Witness, classified as a cult movement, is illegal. They can visit the country as long as they avoid activities that the government sees as engaging citizens in joining the cult. Since 1972.

Pros of censorship:

Blocking controversial and inappropriate content

Protects minors from inappropriate content

Cons of censorship:

Blocking out people's opinions

displeasure from the citizens

# data[].attributes.body
Media and press control(censorship)

The censoring of other news outlets that are not under the control of the government, not allowing true freedom of speech amongst citizens of Singapore. Example: Lawsuits Against Foreign Media

• Singapore has also taken legal action against foreign publications that criticize the government. For instance, in the past, The Economist and Financial Times have been sued for defamation after publishing articles that were critical of Singapore's political system. These lawsuits have often led to retractions, fines, or damages paid to government officials.

Pros: the censorship of certain media can ensure that the members of the community will not see false information spread online by unknown media outlets. Prevents conflict amongst government and citizens, because once controversial opinions are thrown out, people may react strongly with different opinions sparking conflict within the community

Cons:

1.Singaporeans may not know of certain news due to censorship from the government preventing them from being aware of current events.

2.singaporeans may not be able to obtain the same amount of knowledge as other’s from other countries

# data[].attributes.body
Sexuality, terrorism films banned by Singapore (5 April 2008)

The films Arabs and Terrorism and David the Tolhildan were "disallowed on the account of the sympathetic portrayal of organizations deemed terrorist organizations by many countries," said Amy Chua, chair of the Board of Film Censors. The other films that are banned include A Jihad for Love by Parvez Sharma, which concerns homosexuals living within Muslim communities. Chua said the film was not permitted to be shown because of the "sensitive nature of the subject."

# data[].attributes.body
Katy Perry's hit single, I Kissed a Girl, was banned from the airwaves as its lyrics that described homosexuality violated the Free-To-Air Radio Programme Code.

# data[].attributes.body
(According to google, nine titles on netflix have been taken down due to censorship.)

Pros

-One of censorship’s primary advantages is its ability to prevent disseminating sensitive information that may threaten national security or public safety.

-One of censorship’s primary advantages is its ability to prevent disseminating sensitive information that may threaten national security or public safety.

-Censorship that shields children from exposure to inappropriate or harmful content helps promote their psychological well-being, moral development, and safety in digital environments.

Cons

-By restricting access to certain content, governments shape public opinion and limit the spread of dissenting viewpoints

-Censorship that shields children from exposure to inappropriate or harmful content helps promote their psychological well-being, moral development, and safety in digital environments.

-When used as a propaganda tool, censorship manipulates narratives, distorts truths, and controls public perception, influencing individuals’ beliefs and attitudes through selective information exposure.

# data[].attributes.body
One recent example is playwright Chong Tze Chien's Charged (2010), a well-crafted army drama thick with suspense that confronted race relations in Singapore. It brought to light the secret prejudices many Singaporeans harbour despite co-existing in a multicultural environment. It received an R18 rating for "mature content and coarse language". The MDA justified: "Due to the realistic portrayal of racial tensions and use of strong language within the army camp, the issues discussed could be... unsuitable for a young audience."

https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/art-of-censorship-in-singapore

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Censorship has long dogged artists in Singapore. It is a dull ache, with the occasional painful twist.

The most recent - and perhaps unintended - turn of the screw came on May 12 when the Media Development Authority (MDA) released its proposed amendments to the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act for public consultation.

The authority sees this new move as an "empowering" one, and it could have been. But a myriad of punitive measures and caveats have left artists dismayed that it might encourage self-censorship.

Under it, arts practitioners are to be trained by the MDA as "content assessors" to ensure compliance with the authority's classification guidelines.

The trouble is that not all artists agree with the guidelines. Nor are they likely to always agree with what MDA might classify as a performance. It is, after all, a matter of subjective judgment whether a performance merits an Advisory 16 classification - no age restriction imposed but it suggests that the content may not be suitable for younger audiences - or labelled R18, restricted to those aged 18 and above. The most stringent classification is Not Allowed For All Ratings - which is effectively a ban.

The MDA argues that its across-the-board training sessions for content assessors help ensure consistency. But this in effect means that artists have to second-guess officialdom. Might they opt for a stricter classification to avoid falling foul of the authorities? Groups whose content assessors mis-classify performances could face a fine of up to $5,000, and may have their licences revoked.

It is no wonder that many in the arts community find it difficult to reconcile these measures with the supposed progressiveness of "co-regulation".

Despite its good intentions, the scheme falls back into the same template of censorship, of allowing the authorities to be the arbiter of what is in the "public interest", rather than trusting the artist to be responsible, and trusting the audience to be able to judge a work critically. As a result, on May 30, 45 arts groups registered strong objections to the scheme in a position paper addressed to the MDA.

Artists are often viewed here as a vocal minority of rabble-rousers separate from the man in the street. But these are not merely the grouses of a few. The 45 groups represent a large swathe of the arts community, including commercial heavyweights like the Singapore Repertory Theatre and Wild Rice, and traditional arts groups such as the Chinese Theatre Circle. It is also likely that their regular audiences will be supportive of their decision.

As the position paper puts it: "Artists and arts practitioners... are also citizens, parents, members of religious groups, live in the 'heartlands', and we pay our taxes - like everyone else. It is misguided to presume that artists' interests are at odds with community's interests."

I believe that it is in the MDA's interest to heed their concerns, if the arts landscape in Singapore is to continue to flourish - or risk falling into the relentless trap of "one step forward, two steps back".

The 2010 Censorship Review Committee described censorship as "a necessary tool, but a blunt one", and affirmed the need for consumers to be responsible in deciding what they choose to view. The Government can no longer act as gatekeeper, especially in a digital age where access to graphic material is a click away.

The MDA has stressed that the Arts Term Licensing Scheme is optional. This provides arts groups with a false dichotomy: to continue with the current regime where the MDA issues all classifications and advisories, or to choose to be part of a different regime that is ultimately the same: being trained to heed the MDA's specifications.

For so long, the authorities have been wary of trusting the populace with the responsibility of weighing what is in the "public good". Knee-jerk reactions by small groups of people to what they view as "offensive" performances have led to clampdowns on arts groups, without the population at large being given a chance to grapple with various shades of grey of these performances.

The arts community has reiterated that it does not champion an irresponsible approach to artistic creation. Certainly performances must be within the ambit of the law, and those who break the laws of sedition or are guilty of inciting hatred between various groups of people must be held accountable.

But the role of the artist is to forge new paths and tackle new ideas. Some of these issues may be discomfiting to segments of the population - but the arts provide a safe platform, within the realm of imagination, where contentious issues can be discussed and grappled with.

One recent example is playwright Chong Tze Chien's Charged (2010), a well-crafted army drama thick with suspense that confronted race relations in Singapore. It brought to light the secret prejudices many Singaporeans harbour despite co-existing in a multicultural environment. It received an R18 rating for "mature content and coarse language". The MDA justified: "Due to the realistic portrayal of racial tensions and use of strong language within the army camp, the issues discussed could be... unsuitable for a young audience."

But perhaps an Advisory 16 classification would have sufficed? This way, teenagers about to do full-time national service could have mulled over portrayals of racial tensions on stage and reflected on how the issue might emerge in real life.

As an avid consumer of the arts, I have not seen a single production here that exploits violence or sexuality in a way that would leave anyone vulnerable to attack. Rather, the art is mostly considered and thoughtful. It may not always be executed perfectly, but it is steeped in earnestness and social conscience.

I think it is time for us to trust the artists who have grown in our midst. Instead of fearing debate and fining a group for a piece that, perhaps, only two people found objectionable, the MDA could be a facilitator and bridge-builder.

It could bring together the arts group and audience members for a mediation session, where the latter could better understand the artistic intention of the work, and the artists have a chance to see where the audience is coming from. This empowers the artist - who is given a chance to stand up for his or her work, and improve it - and the audience members, who can choose to embrace an alternative point of view, or decide not to purchase tickets from this group in the future.

In the end, we should not expect all art to be comforting or pleasant. The Guardian newspaper's theatre critic, Lyn Gardner, wrote in a recent column: "I love being charmed and delighted in the theatre, but I don't want to be killed with kindness by artists, I want to be provoked by them and made to look at the world differently... If that sometimes means they are going to risk boring me, offending me or even being cruel to me, then I'm not going to complain. Great art is seldom easy or kind."

The mirror that art holds up to life may not always reflect beauty. It may reflect the ugliness of humanity, or its lack of virtue. But good art interrogates the human condition in all its weird and wonderful states, and puts them all on display, so that we who look gain insight into our own lives.
corriet@sph.com.sg A step towards 'co-regulation'
THE Media Development Authority (MDA) announced its Arts Term Licensing Scheme on May 12. It is set to have a pilot run next month.

The voluntary scheme is meant to give artists and arts groups that sign up for it more agency in self-classifying their shows. This scheme was floated during the 2010 censorship review.

Right now, the MDA assesses every single production - a process which can take up to 40 days. It then gives it an age-appropriate advisory or rating. Under the proposed term licensing scheme, selected arts groups can classify multiple productions on their own.

Groups taking part in the scheme will need to appoint an MDA-registered content assessor, who will be trained in classifying each show according to the authority's classification code.

Licensing officers from the MDA have the authority to reject groups' classifications and revoke their licences.

Groups whose content assessors mis-classify performances could also face a fine of up to $5,000. Those who disagree with the licensing officer's decisions can appeal to the Minister.

MDA says this is meant to "facilitate the creation of an environment which allows arts practitioners to undertake greater ownership and responsibility for their content in ensuring it meets community standards; and to be able to directly engage in dialogue with society".

The MDA views this as a step towards "co-regulation", its term for working together with artists to define classification boundaries. It invited the public to give their comments on the scheme in a public consultation that closed on May 30.
CORRIE TAN

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Censorship has long dogged artists in Singapore. It is a dull ache, with the occasional painful twist. The most recent - and perhaps unintended - turn of the screw came on May 12 when the Media Development Authority (MDA) released its proposed amendments to the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act for public consultation.

# data[].attributes.body
In 2020, Thai restaurant SOMTUMS faced backlash after posting a job advertisement that specified “Chinese-only” applicants, which was seen as racially discriminatory. The restaurant later apologized and removed the ad, sparking wider discussions on racial bias in Singapore's hiring practices.

# data[].attributes.body
Local film #LookAtMe barred from screening in Singapore over potential to cause social division

The film was refused classification because it has "the potential to cause enmity and social division in Singapore’s multi-racial and multi-religious society", said a joint statement from the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) and the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA).

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/film-lookatme-ken-kwek-religion-homosexuality-pastor-barred-screening-3011331

# data[].attributes.body
Social media platforms to remove harmful content, add safeguards under Singapore's proposed rules

Social media platforms like Facebook, TikTok and Twitter will soon be legally required to implement safety standards and content moderation processes to minimise users' risk of exposure to harmful online content like terrorist propaganda, under Singapore's new set of proposed Internet rules.

https://www.straitstimes.com/tech/tech-news/social-media-platforms-to-remove-harmful-content-add-safeguards-for-young-under-spores-internet-rules

# data[].attributes.body
Arts union Equity has criticised a "growing culture of censorship" after a play was cancelled, reportedly in a dispute over references to the Israel-Gaza war and trans rights in September 18 2024

# data[].attributes.body
the death of singapore theatre: review

https://www.straitstimes.com/life/arts/theatre-review-the-death-of-singapore-theatre-a-cathartic-work-raging-against-censorship

# data[].attributes.body
The ban on the film "To Singapore, With Love", a documentary by filmmaker Tan Pin Pin. The film, which features interviews with Singaporean political exiles, was banned in 2014 for "undermining national security" as it was deemed to present a one-sided view of individuals who had fled Singapore for political reasons.

# data[].attributes.body
"The Last Temptation of Christ" is a novel first published in 1955 by Nikos Kazantzakis, which talked about Jesus and his struggles with various forms, including fear, doubt, depression, reluctance, and lust.

This had many Catholics and Christians challenging this novel. This led to its controversy as it contains evil slanders against the Godlike person of Jesus Christ and therefore being censored in Singapore by 1988.

# data[].attributes.body
Singapore Malay film with LGBTQ elements sparks 'haram' criticism

Date: 30 June 2024

Link: https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/lifestyle-culture/article/3272062/singapore-malay-film-lgbtq-elements-sparks-haram-criticisms-calls-dialogue

Pros of censorship: Racial harmony / less riots, less / no exposure to inappropriate themes

Cons of censorship: Teenagers get too curious and use illegal websites to satisfy any curiousity, no free speech

# data[].attributes.body
Link: https://freedomhouse.org/country/singapore/freedom-net/2019

In November and December 2018, the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) temporarily blocked online news outlets the States Times Review and the Singapore Herald after they did not comply with takedown orders

Blocked in late November and December 2018