I just saw a news clip in the Today Newspaper, which said that Mr. Louise Ng, the Member of Parliament (MP) for Nee Soon Group Representation Constituency (GRC) was being investigated by the police for holding up a “smiley face” encouraging people to support their local hawkers. The full story can be found at:
It goes without saying part of the reason why the police are
investigating Mr. Ng is the fact that the Onlinecitizen, one of our
socio-political websites asked if Mr. Ng had obtained a public license to do so
and whether he’d be charged for holding up a smiley face in public if he had
not. This is a particularly pertinent question especially when it comes right
after an activist called Jolvan Wham put Singapore on the map by getting
charged for causing “public disorder” for holding up a placard of a smiley
face. So, in fairness to the Online Citizen, it was important to raise the
issue of whether there were any “double standards” in how the law was being
applied to an MP and an activist.
However, what I find particularly interesting is why the
smiley face has become a symbol of public disorder. There is, as far as I know,
no evidence of any terrorist group that has resorted to using an emoji, let
alone a smiling face (π) as its symbol. The smiley face π
as far as I know is a symbol of happiness.
So, why did the authorities find so threatening about Mr.
Wham and Mr. Ng holding up a smiley face in public. Mr. Wham’s case is
particularly interesting in as much as he was charged with “public disorder.”
What exactly was the public disorder that he caused? Did he cause any damage to
any property? Did he harass members of the public? Did he hold any symbols glorifying
racism like the Nazi or Confederate flags? Mr. Wham’s crime was the fact that
he stood in public holding a smile π. How exactly was that “Public Disorder.”
Look, nobody is against laws to protect public order. Even
the online media, which is more “anti-government” in its slant has not gone
after the government when it canes vandals. What people do question is why the “smile”
π has become such a threat to the established
order. One might suggests to the powers-that-be in Singapore that by not
allowing someone to stand there holding up a smiley face in public, they are
only going to drive the symbol underground and more importantly, the act of
turning a symbol of happiness into a symbol of anarchy is a sign of internal
weakness when you see threats in the most innocent of things.
1 comment
Yawn, find something more meaningful please.
Post a Comment