SINGAPORE - Freedom of Speech or Social Responsibility?

Freedom of speech basically refers to the freedom to say anything even if it may offensive or may not agree with the norm.
Social responsibility is the practice of intellectual thinking by the society itself i.e. the people do not deliberately offend others and are sensitive to and respect each other’s beliefs.

Singer, in the article “Free Speech, Muhammad, and the Holocaust”, takes on the view that in a democratic country, ‘everyone has the right to freedom of expression’. According to him, they can express their opinions openly without breaking any laws set by the public authority. However, Szilagyi claims in the article in International Herald Tribune that social responsibility should be practiced and that that is more important for ‘every new social and political development around the world’.

The cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad provoked much rage among the Muslims. Hence, it is apparent that freedom of speech may lead to religious issues; ‘societal and political tensions can be inflamed instantly’. Hence, in the context of Singapore’s multi-racial society, where there is cultural and religious pluralism, it is wiser to adopt social responsibility. This is because Singapore, as a multi-racial and religious country, is highly susceptible to racial and religious conflicts. Racial harmony is of great importance to Singapore and in order to sustain this harmony, it must ensure that there is no probability of a riot to start. Hence, each Singaporean should be responsible enough to be aware of other ethnic groups and their beliefs and act accordingly without offending them.

“Prejudice is a disease we can never get rid of”. Discuss.

Yes, I agree that prejudice is indeed a disease we can never get rid of. According to dictionary.com, prejudice is ‘an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason’. A disease, in this context, is something that is unpleasant and long-lasting. There are a many ways in which prejudice occurs. It can exist based on differences in races, sexes, nationalities, groups, religious affiliations, church affiliations, educational levels, and so on. For a person’s judgments to be true, it should not be based on "nothing." If one person decides that another is doing something wrong or suspicious, it should be because of his respective actions rather than because of simply dressing a certain way, for example. However, is this always possible for all to follow?

A quote on prejudice (by Edward Roscoe Murrow, 31 December 1955) says that “Everyone is a prisoner of his own experiences. No one can eliminate prejudices - just recognize them.” I totally agree with this since I also believe that prejudice is not something that we can totally destroy. For example, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X and Abraham Lincoln fought against the prejudice of black people by the whites in America. However, studies have shown that prejudice of the blacks still exist today, even though to a much smaller extent.

References:
http://www.dictionary.com
http://www.pursuingthetruth.org/sermons/files/prejudice.htm
http://www.quotegarden.com/prejudice.html

“YouTube has no ethics, it's been created for the sole purpose of entertainment and money.” Do you agree?

Yes, I agree that YouTube has no ethics and that it has been created for the sole purpose of entertainment and money. YouTube, a website created in 2005, offers thousands of videos, ranging from funny clips to movies to television shows. Much controversy arises when people consider the role YouTube play and would play in their everyday lives. This is due to lawsuits and copyright issues. For example, according to an article dated March 16, 2007 in the newsweek magazine, “many YouTube clips consist of copyrighted material owned by established companies like Viacom”.

YouTube today is clearly an entrepreneur success, serving over 100 million videos and receiving about 65,000 video uploads each day. According to Alexa which is an online site that provides statistics of web traffic, YouTube is ranked the 10th most popular website, which obviously shows that it serves as a major entertainment medium to attract people worldwide. However, the fact that YouTube has no ethics is proved by the “Thailand blocks access to YouTube” on BBC news. YouTube contained a video showing “graffiti over the king's face” which was offensive to the Thais. Thus, this has caused the site to be banned in Thailand. YouTube’s refusal to remove the film showed that the managers of YouTube does not care about the morals behind the videos or the unrest caused by them, but only care about the profits they can achieve.

References:
http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~nngai/index.htm
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17653832/site/newsweek/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6528303.stm

Intro

Hey! My name is Sree. I am from Cedar girls' sec. I am a 1st intaker. My previous CCA was Guitar(during 1st intake). I am now in Project Eureka and TLDDS. My hobbies are reading, watching TV and surfing the net. My favourite colours are red and black, I like fruits(especially mango!)

I am a very cheerful person and I have not yet come across a person whom I cannot get along with. I admire humorous people a lot! I really hope to make lots of friends in 30/07!

Signing off...