Joycelyn
Yew
A0126923
ES1102
[A04]
Increasingly,
social media platforms such as Facebook have become platforms for anonymous
groups in Singapore to target and attack popular social media influences such
as bloggers. While what these groups post on their social media pages may seem
harmless and even taken as a joke to some, there have been instances where
these “jokes” have had the potential to cause physical harm to their victims. For
instance, the home address of Singapore blogger Wendy Cheng, also known as
“Xiaxue” was exposed online by a follower of the anonymous Facebook group “SMRT
Ltd Feedback” in 2014. The follower had used an online tool that SMRTfeedback
had posted on its Facebook page to find out Wendy’s address (Cheng, 2015) .
The reason for this being, they simply did not like her. With thousands of
followers on SMRTFeedbacks Facebook page, exposing their victim’s home address
online puts their lives in danger. Laws such as the Protection from Harassment
Act aim to protect individuals against cyber harassment such as seen in Wendy
Cheng’s case. The solution however, is not entirely full proof. For example,
perpetrators are not required to expose their identities; as such they are still
able to harass their victims using another online identity. To solve this, the
Protection Act should require for cyber harassers to expose their identities
online.
In
2014, Singapore full-time blogger Wendy Cheng filed for a Protection Order
against the anonymous vigilante group SMRT Ltd (Feedback). According to Wendy,
the anonymous group had been harassing her via social media platforms like
twitter and Facebook. The group has allegedly posted insulting and derogatory
comments about her looks and her character and even accused her of rigging her
blog’s statistic counter. This could have potentially affected her blogging
career (Koh, 2015) .
When her home address was posted online for virtually anyone to see, Wendy
filed for the Protection Order for fear of the safety of her 2-year-old son and
elderly mother. This is not the first time that the anonymous group has exposed
the home address of a person online. In 2014, following an incident where a Sim
Lim Square shop owner Jover Chew swindled a Vietnamese tourist into paying a
highly exorbitant price for an IPhone, the self-proclaimed vigilante group took
justice into their own hands by exposing the home address of Jover Chew online
so that online users could play pranks on him in punishment for his misdeed. While
these may all seem like harmless pranks, they actually pose danger to victim’s
lives as well as their careers and businesses. As such, it is very evident to
see that social media have indeed provided a platform for anonymous groups in
Singapore to attack other users online without having to face any sorts of
punishment for their actions.
The
Protection Order was put in place in 2014. Unlike any other acts, the
Protection Order is extended to the anonymous on social media. The act helps to
“protect persons against harassment, unlawful stalking and provide civil
remedies in relation to false states of fact” (Yam, 2014) .
This means that cyber harassers will no longer be able to make untrue or
derogatory statements, or expose personal details about their victims under the
Protection Order. Harassers are liable to punishment if they fail to obey the
order. While the act may be effective in punishing harassers, it fails to take
into consideration certain issues, as such making the solution to the problem
of cyber harassment a non-full proof one. For example, the Protection Order
does not require anonymous entities to expose their identities. This means that anonymous groups like SMRTFeedback
can actually pose as another social media persona to attack its victims without
breaking the rules of the Protection Order. Being able to remain anonymous
empowers individuals to misbehave or do deviant acts since they do not need to
take responsibility for their actions online. Not requiring these groups to
expose their identities as such does not strip them of this false sense of
power.
In
order to make the Protection Harassment Act a more effective one, the Act needs
to require anonymous persons to expose their identities to the law. This is
firstly to ensure that harassers do not set up different accounts in order to
continue their acts online without getting caught for cyber harassing their
victims since nobody will actually know that it is still they behind the
different accounts. Secondly, exposing
their identities will also force these anonymous groups or individuals to take
full responsibility for their actions on social media platforms. Having to
account for their online actions in real life can as such help to strip them of
their power of anonymity, helping to deter these groups from misbehaving
online.
Aside
from the Protection Harassment Act that has been implemented, the Singapore police
force has also put in place “Cybercrime Command”, an act within the Criminal
investigation Department (CID) in order to combat cybercrimes (Lim, 2015) .
The cybercrime command aims to create a platform whereby young Singaporeans who
use the Internet often are able to work hand in hand with the police in
investigating cyber-harassers. The Internet is a huge network; it is nearly
impossible for the police to track down every single activity. As such, the
platform will be an effective measure to take towards cyber-harassment as it
allows the online community to give “tip-offs” to the CID whenever they witness
an online harassment taking place, the CID will then look into the issue and
take necessary actions on the harassers. (Liang, 2015) .
While
Cybercrime command may be effective in locating and punishing cyber-harassers,
like the Protection Harassment Act, it is not a preventive measure towards
cyber-harassment. Both measures only solve the issue as it arises. In order to
combat cyber-harassment, actions need to be taken at the root of the problem.
To prevent these anonymous groups from harassing their victims. A preventive
measure would be stating rules that comments exposing personal information of
their victims are not allowed to be posted on social media platform pages. The
Singapore government can collaborate with Social media platform administrators
such as on Facebook, to hire “online patrolling police” to ensure that social
media accounts that have been reported by victims for cyber-harassments do not
post comments, exposing personal details that can potentially cause physical harm
to its victims. Should there be any form of these types of cyber-harassment
detected, the social media account of the anonymous group will then be forced
to shut down after a warning.
As the
saying goes “prevention is better than cure.”
Attempting to solve the issue of cyber harassment through laws such as
the Protection act order and the Cybercrime command may be effective in certain
ways as mentioned above. However in order to prevent cyber harassment from
taking place, cooperation between both social media platform administrators and
the police force is necessary.
References:
Cheng, W. (2015, February 6). xiaxue. Retrieved from
www.xiaxue.blogspot.com.sg
Koh, V. (2015, February 6). Channelnewsasia.
Retrieved from
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/xiaxue-takes-out/1641824.html
Liang, L. Y. (2015, March 6). the staits time singapore.
Retrieved from http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/more-singapore-stories/story/new-cybercrime-unit-within-the-cid-be-set-20150306
Lim, Y. (2015, March 06). channelnewsasia. Retrieved
from
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/police-to-set-up-new/1698876.html
Yam, P. T. (2014, September 19). Singapore Statuses
Online. Retrieved from
http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/aol/search/display/view.w3p;page=0;query=DocId%3A%2207275b05-417a-4de5-a316-4c15606a2b8d%22%20Status%3Ainforce%20Depth%3A0;rec=0
No comments:
Post a Comment