SINGAPORE: When you saw the post on social media a few years ago alleging that a local supermarket was selling “halal” pork, what did you do?

Some instinctively shared it. Others might have taken a minute to consider its veracity and decided against it. 

Perhaps it’s time we are all encouraged to do so.

These days it’s becoming harder to tell what’s real and what isn’t.

Sophisticated machinery, bots and fake accounts converge to create manufactured information that often seems legitimate.

Many examples of deliberate online falsehoods have been cited in the last few months as Parliament debated the issue and a Select Committee was formed to examine it. Public hearings on the issue began on Wednesday (Mar 14).

In their Green Paper, the Ministry of Communications and Information and Ministry of Law gave several examples of falsehoods that have been deliberately spread online, “to attack public institutions and individuals”. 

“The aim is to sow discord amongst racial and religious communities, exploit fault-lines, undermine public institutions, interfere in elections as well as other democratic processes, and weaken countries,” it said.

One overseas example was a rumour that former US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and her chief of staff were running a paedophile ring out of a pizza restaurant in Washington DC. The rumour had gone viral, and led to threats and demonstrations against the restaurant and its owners.

In Italy, a 2016 referendum on proposals to significantly overhaul its constitution is said to have attracted falsehoods spread by foreign state-linked media, as well as domestic parties opposed to the proposals. 

Online news sites linked to one of the Italian parties are said to have inundated the lead-up to the referendum with falsehoods, and sought to undermine proposed reforms and discredit then-Prime Minister Matteo Renzi.

Researcher Dr Mathew Mathews in his oral and written representations to the Select Committee on the first day of public hearings on deliberate online falsehoods pointed out how deliberate online falsehoods by elements seeking to exploit existing divisions within our society for their own ends, could harm social cohesion. 

He cited a local example of how website The Real Singapore had spread a story about a Filipino family complaining about Singaporeans who played music loudly during the Thaipusam religious festival.

Dr Michael Raska of the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies Singapore pointed out that the use of disinformation campaigns aimed at political, racial and religious fracture points can offset an attacker’s military inferiority adding that the use of social media has become as vital as conventional military warfare. 

Clearly, disinformation can have a significant impact.

This is why in the coming months, as policies, laws and regulations are shaped, it isn’t just the Government that needs to be working on the issue.

READ: A commentary on reviewing the threats in deliberate online falsehoods and relooking what Total Defence means.

DEVELOPING A HEALTHY SCEPTICISM

Each of us, as consumers of information, needs to be sensitised to such deliberate falsehoods.

According to the Ministry of Education, information literacy, which helps students discern the authenticity of digital information, is “infused into a variety of academic subjects” like English, History and Social Studies. It is also taught in the cyber-wellness syllabus for primary and secondary schools, as part of the Character and Citizenship Education curriculum.

Similar efforts are gaining momentum in other countries too.

Hopefully, this will lead to students being equipped with the critical thinking and analytical skills that will lead them to have a healthy scepticism of information they are exposed to.

It may get harder to tell truth from fiction as falsehoods also cover doppelganger news websites such as fake CNN news pages. This requires even more discernment.

To check veracity, experts have recommended reviewing multiple sources, using Google’s reverse image search to check whether photos are legitimate and among other things, looking up domain records to see if a news outlet is unfamiliar.

Checking the elements within a story such as whether the sources are named, who they are, whether opposing opinions are provided, whether the story is too good to be true or too ridiculous to believe have been suggested too. 

CLEAR DEFINITIONS – FOR ALL OF US

While we exercise a healthy scepticism, we need to have clarity on what encompasses deliberate online falsehoods.

The term that has been most commonly bandied about lately – “fake news” – seems to cover everything from disagreements with the media, differences of opinion, mistakes, rumour, conspiracy theories, hoaxes and propaganda.

Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) senior research fellow Carol Soon and research assistant Shawn Goh, in their written representation to the Select Committee, noted that the “overly broad use” of the term fake news is “problematic on many fronts.” They added:

As such, the select committee’s focus on deliberate online falsehoods (instead of just fake news) is a commendable move.

They pointed to news that is “deliberately fabricated with the intent to deceive, motivated by economic gains or political influence and assumes the disguise or trappings of an authoritative news source”.

Some netizens have questioned whether efforts to clamp down on deliberate online falsehoods are the Government’s way of silencing dissent. Will this mean that the only thing that will win in this information war is “government propaganda”?

The authorities seem to be aware of these concerns, which is why policies and legislation are likely to be defined clearly to prevent abuse.

Considering that any type of deliberate falsehood can cause anxiety and has the potential to destroy societies, people on the ground need to understand these definitions too in order to be able to call out deliberate online falsehoods appropriately. 

BEYOND TRUE OR FALSE

Laws and regulations can reduce the clutter and protect a society, but ultimately the onus is on thinking individuals to be able to evaluate the remaining information onslaught that could persist in spite of measures taken by the authorities.

This is an opportunity to also equip ourselves with tools to better analyse and develop the ability to form informed opinions about information in general, beyond true or false.

For instance, we need to acknowledge that fact is different from opinion.

If an expressed opinion doesn’t sit well with you, launching a vituperative attack by calling it a falsehood or “fake news” is certainly not warranted.

Information is far from binary, that is, real or fake.

That’s just the first layer.

Aside from authenticity, information analysis encompasses context, bias, viewpoints, agendas – both the information providers’ and our own.

We may all be presented with the same set of information but how each of us processes it or comes to conclusions about it could differ greatly.

The goal is not for all of us to come to the same conclusions. Rather, it is for each of us to come to informed conclusions bearing in mind the various layers.

MULTIPLICITY OF SOURCES

Any media literacy programme can only give us the tools to do this for ourselves. A didactic or protectionist approach, regardless of who initiates it, will not work to create a thinking audience – which should be our goal.

I have friends who declare that they’ve stopped consuming mainstream media because it is nothing but government propaganda. These are individuals who are also harsh critics of government policy. 

There’s nothing wrong with being critical, but in order to criticise something intelligently, surely you need to know what it is exactly you’re criticising. Some of their criticism is based on inaccurate information or perceptions of policies.

That’s where it gets dangerous – forming opinions without knowing the facts or possibly based on misinformation from unreliable sources. 

By no means does being vigilant against sources of deliberate online falsehoods mean only trusting one or two information sources.

Today, information sources have become more diverse. Some experts say more credible alternative news sources should be encouraged in any society in order to create a culture of debate and for consumers of information, a culture of informed analysis and discussion.

But instead of availing ourselves of multiple sources, many end up living in their own echo chambers, exercising our own confirmation bias.

While the multiplicity of sources can serve to confound, if reliable, it can also serve to inform and encourage plurality of opinions, helping people gain access to not just knowledge but a sense-making of knowledge.

QUESTION EVERYTHING

As far as possible, we need to take advantage of the situation to help ourselves and future generations develop such skills. Don’t just read what social media platform algorithms curate for you. 

The key is to adopt a critical stance when evaluating any argument and question everything whether it feeds our own worldview or not.

Technology has also empowered individuals to create information for audiences. This is why these efforts should go further to inform not just consumption, but creation as well.

Participating in open discussions of current issues, not just in school but encouraging it at home could help us develop the sensibilities required to do this in an intelligent and balanced manner.

It’s a start to learning how to process diverse information sources and how to form our own information-gathering and opinion-formation skills.

Here is an opportunity for all of us, while working to address the weaponisation of information through deliberate online falsehoods, to make information a source of power to create a thinking society that enriches public discourse and in turn, the way we live, not just online, but offline as well.

Bharati Jagdish is the host of Channel NewsAsia Digital News’ hard-hitting On The Record, a weekly interview with thought leaders across Singapore, and The Pulse, Channel NewsAsia’s weekly podcast that discusses the hottest issues of the week.

REUTERS: Wall Street opened higher on Wednesday as technology stocks recovered from losses and economic data further eased fears of faster interest rate hikes in 2018.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 90.02 points, or 0.36 percent, to 25,097.05. The S&P 500 gained 9.24 points, or 0.33414 percent, to 2,774.55. The Nasdaq Composite added 28.62 points, or 0.38 percent, to 7,539.64.

(Reporting by Sruthi Shankar in Bengaluru; Editing by Arun Koyyur)

SINGAPORE: Singapore’s deterrence and defence capabilities are “second to none” in the region. But countries with inferior military might could weaken Singapore by exploiting issues that cause tensions among groups, said Assistant Professor Michael Raska from Nanyang Technological University on Wednesday (Mar 14).

Speaking at the first public hearing of the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods, Dr Raska, who is from the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies, added that cyber-enabled information conflicts essentially challenge concepts of deterrence.

The changing character of conflict invites “asymmetrical types of strategies” that may offset anyone’s military inferiority and achieve similar political outcomes, he said. 

Dr Raska was responding to a question from committee member and Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam, on the first day of the committee’s public hearings in Parliament. 

“If you want to weaken Singapore, but you don’t think you can do it through military means in the first place, the logical conclusion is that you must first engage in information warfare?” Mr Shanmugam had asked. 

Dr Raska said that was correct. 

“I think there’s a sense in Singapore of a type of invulnerability towards these kind of threats because Singapore is so small, it can block any sort of external foreign media interference, and it can basically identify this kind of attack,” he said. 

“But I believe this is not necessarily correct, because that type of crisis is not necessarily from within Singapore.”

“SUBTLE INFORMATION” CAMPAIGN TO IDENTIFY FRACTION POINTS

Countries could use a “subtle information” type of gradual campaign that would identify society’s fraction points and political fraction points that create tensions, he said. 

“These points are any issues that either put specific groups together or put specific groups apart. And so once you have done that, then you can essentially from outside tailor specific communication towards Singapore,” he added.

“If Singapore is hit by cyber or information type of attack, in conjunction with a terrorist attack, how does Singapore deter them in the first place, and how does Singapore respond militarily? Particularly if these attacks can happen far away, from places where conventional reach is not viable,” he asked. 

In his written representation to the committee, Dr Raska added that under the changing nature of conflict, Singapore and the Singapore Armed Forces will likely have to “redefine its objectives necessary” to achieve “victory”.

“The use of social media campaigns in conflicts is becoming as important as winning the military campaign,” he said. 

SINGAPORE: For the first time, Johora singaporensis crablets have been successfully hatched outside of their natural environment, as part of efforts to repopulate the critically endangered species.

Led by the Crab Working Group, which includes members from the National Parks Board (NParks), the National University of Singapore (NUS) and the Wildlife Reserves Singapore (WRS), the effort resulted in more than 40 crablets being hatched and subsequently growing into healthy juveniles.

They are the offspring of one pregnant female crab that was among a few of the crustaceans collected by researchers in December last year.

“If we manage to bring all these 40-plus crablets to full maturity, it will represent a fairly significant proportion of crabs out there in total,” said Mr Lim Liang Jim, group director of NParks’ National Biodiversity Centre.

Typically found in fast-moving streams in hills, the Johora singaporensis, commonly known as the Singapore Freshwater Crab, is one of three known species of crabs that can only be found in Singapore.

However, with researchers estimating the current adult population of the species to be in the hundreds, the pebble-sized freshwater crab is on the brink of extinction. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) considers it critically endangered and among the 100 most threatened species worldwide.

To ensure the successful hatching of the eggs, researchers modified tanks to be similar to the crab’s natural habitat. This includes using water taken from the streams, as well as installing pumps to mimic the fast-flowing current and oxygen-rich water it lives in.

Additional measures, such as separating the crablets from each other as well as the mother crab, were also taken to increase their chances of survival. This is because Johora singaporensis are known to be a relatively aggressive species, with past cases of cannibalism and fights leading to death.

With very little known about the species, researchers hope to learn more about the ecology and biology of the crabs by observing them. Going forward, the researchers will be looking at getting male and female crabs to mate and breed.

“Our ultimate aim is to build up the pool of specimens to where we can release and repopulate the wild population,” said Mr Lim.

SINGAPORE: Private sector economists are pencilling in higher growth for Singapore’s economy this year, the latest quarterly survey from the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) showed on Wednesday (Mar 14). 

Economic growth for 2018 is expected to come in at 3.2 per cent, according to the 24 economists and analysts polled. This is up from an earlier 3 per cent forecast in December. 

For next year, expectations are for Singapore’s gross domestic product (GDP) to expand by 2.8 per cent. 

This comes on the back of official data last month, which showed the economy clocking faster-than-expected growth of 3.6 per cent for 2017 and the year’s final quarter. Official estimates also tipped 2018 growth to come in slightly above the middle of the forecast range of 1.5 to 3.5 per cent, barring the materialisation of any downside risks. 

Since the last survey in December, respondents have lifted their forecasts for most economic indicators for 2018, including finance & insurance, wholesale & retail trade, accommodation & food services and private consumption. 

The indicators that either maintained or had a downward revision in their forecasts are manufacturing, construction and non-oil domestic exports. 

Nearly half of the respondents singled out an outperformance in the electronics sector as the main potential upside for the economy. Buoyed by stronger global demand, the manufacturing sector, particularly electronics, has been the key driver of Singapore’s economic growth for 2017 though chances of a moderation have been flagged partly because of a comparison against a high base.

A generally positive outlook on external growth also continues to be another common upside risk in the survey results, at around 41 per cent. 

There also appears to be increasing optimism on the property market, with a noticeable rise in the proportion of respondents citing it, from 27 per cent in the previous survey to 41 per cent.

On the other hand, 88 per cent of respondents cited the possibility of a global trade war scenario as one that they are concerned about, more than double of that in the December survey. 

The threat of a slowdown in the Chinese economy is comparatively more subdued, at 53 per cent of responses, down from 67 per cent previously. Financial sector uncertainty due to global market movements, at 18 per cent of responses, represents the third most common downside risk. 

The forecasts for both headline and core inflation in 2018 remained unchanged from the previous survey at one and 1.6 per cent, respectively. 

On the labour front, respondents also expect the unemployment rate to be 2.1 per cent at year-end, unchanged from the previous survey.