Opinion: In Solidarity With Wake Up Singapore’s Ariffin Sha

6 May 2024
 
As independent media organisations and practitioners, we stand in solidarity with Ariffin Sha, the founder and administrator of online news platform Wake Up Singapore (WUSG), as he faces a criminal defamation charge for publishing falsehoods in 2022 about KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital (KKH).
 
It’s clear that the false allegations against KKH were serious. It’s also clear that WUSG made a mistake in not waiting for KKH’s official verifications, before publishing the report.
 
Notwithstanding those serious journalistic lapses, we believe that WUSG performed admirably after KKH filed a police report. WUSG's subsequent and swift admission of its journalistic errors, alongside apologies, retractions, and complying with a POFMA order, was sufficient, we feel, to signal the importance of journalistic standards, which we all believe in. It’s also sufficient to maintain the integrity of Singapore’s public health system. 

We are therefore concerned with the criminal defamation charge. Even if Ariffin is cleared by the courts, the charge against him and the costs of contesting that charge risk further worsening the already hostile climate for non-mainstream media outfits in Singapore.

We believe that defamation should be a civil, not criminal, issue, and we also believe that the law should be wielded sparingly. We note that approaches to clarify and correct mistakes in the media already exist, without the need to resort to such charges. Major media publications in Singapore and around the world have tried-and-tested systems for acknowledging and correcting editorial mistakes, and remaining accountable to their readers. These corrections are often accompanied by institutional introspection to ensure that journalistic and editorial standards are maintained. Very rarely are these lessons learnt in the shadow of criminal charges.
 
A recent incident involving The Straits Times (ST) is illustrative. A non-ST columnist published a falsehood about an opposition party’s electoral strategies, one that could harm its prospects. The leader of the opposition published a Correction Notice on social media. The columnist acknowledged the mistake and made an apology, which said leader accepted. No police report was filed. ST, admirably, published a full correction notice, online and in print, which acknowledged the initial falsehood. No POFMA was issued. No discussion or investigation into the intent of the writer has taken place. Rightly so, as the error was acknowledged and corrected. Apologies were made and lessons were drawn through institutional introspection to ensure that journalistic and editorial standards are maintained and we move on to the next cycle of news.
 
Although the nature of the published falsehoods—at WUSG and at ST—is different, the two cases should give us all cause for pause. How do we promote harmonious modes of societal dialogue that incorporate transparent, self-correcting mechanisms? How do we nudge Singaporeans away from a “report police'' culture that, whatever the merits of each case, has a tendency to be divisive rather than unifying?
 
WUSG’s actions must also be understood in the context of the changing media landscape in Singapore. Independent media outlets, many of which are run by passionate and hardworking volunteers, have burgeoned in the last decade to fill a real gap in news and information. Without the resources and support made available to the mainstream media, these nascent organisations develop their own editorial processes, systems of prevention and responses to journalistic errors when they happen. WUSG’s quick admission, retraction, and detailed public account of what went wrong is an invaluable example of accountability for Singapore’s independent media community. All of us have learned enormously from WUSG’s honesty and transparency.
 
In a media climate like Singapore’s, where independent, critical voices are few and hard to maintain, WUSG and many other independent media outlets are committed to platforming marginalised views, for the betterment of Singapore. In the wake of this criminal defamation charge, WUSG has received an outpouring of support from Singaporeans from all walks of life. Beyond peers in media and civil society groups, individual members of the public have expressed their appreciation for and solidarity with WUSG. These include Grab drivers, bus drivers, and migrant workers, whose voices have been uplifted by WUSG. Even pet owners, whose missing pets were found with WUSG’s help, have acknowledged the value of the platform. The work of Ariffin and his WUSG team should not be imperilled by errors which they have made every effort to correct and prevent from recurring.
 
As fellow independent media organisations, we stand in solidarity with WUSG. We remain concerned over the use of criminal defamation against WUSG’s founder Ariffin Sha as such a charge risks being seen as censorious, and more devastatingly will have a chilling effect on independent media and civil society. Independent media outlets like WUSG are essential to our society in a world of rapid information flows. For a smarter and kinder Singapore, we need a trustworthy media ecosystem that is not afraid to own up to mistakes and be transparent and accountable.
 
Signatories
Community for Advocacy and Political Action (CAPE)
Ethos Books
Jom
Lepak Conversations
Singapore Climate Rally
Singapore Unbound