>
Unless there is some precise definition of fake news, this is just censorship in sheep's clothing.Singaporean here. This is the bill that was proposed in Singapore's parliament on 1 April (PDF): https://www.parliament.gov.sg/docs/default-source/default-do...
The problem that many people have with the bill, as it is, is that it gives the power to Singapore's government ministers to issue "correction" or "stop communication" directions, on the entirely arbitrary grounds of "public interest".
There is a definition of "public interest" in the bill, but it includes a section which contains broad terms like "… to prevent a diminution of public confidence in [the government and its bodies]". The courts have no power to determine whether the public interest need is legitimate.
Second, the bill is procedurally flawed. An entity issued with an order by the minister must comply immediately, or can be charged with non-compliance. If they wish to contest the order, they have to first appeal to the minister, which is not obliged to reply within a fixed period of time. It is only after a minister rejects their appeal that they are allowed to file a case in the High Court (which requires expensive legal representation, unlike the State Courts).
This allows a minister to effectively delay the appeal process indefinitely.
Furthermore, unlike defamation, the minister also has the power to require the given entity to publish a specifically-worded apology (at their own expense).
This is worse than mere censorship — it's giving the government the power to make people say things.
Finally, note that the Singapore government is claiming to have jurisdiction over all media, as long as it is communicated to an end user in Singapore. Content publishers and their intermediaries will also be affected by this law.