| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstEssay" |
|---|
| |
<
< | Clifton Martin | >
> | Xuanyi Lee | | | L6160 Law in the Internet Society | |
<
< | Grindr: A Revolutionary App or A Disease to the LGBT Community? | | | | |
>
> | ‘POFMA’ and the Internet Society in Singapore | | | | |
<
< | Introduction: | | | | |
<
< | Previously you could consider yourself lucky if you met anyone at a club or bar as a gay or bisexual man. In the LGBT community, there was no clear way for men to meet one another; however, today’s phone apps have revolutionized dating for the general public. Grindr, a dating app meant to connect male identifying folks of the LGBT community, lets men locate other Grindr users who are nearby. According to the app’s creator, Joel Simkhai, Grindr is for “guys meeting guys” and it’s meant to help gay men establish relationships, whether that be friendship, dates, or sex. Despite the creator’s intentions, generally most men are using Grindr for casual sex. Therefore, Grindr’s culture of casual sex is problematic as it reinforces an inaccurate, generalized view commonly held by members outside of the LGBT community that queer men are more sexually promiscuous. | | | | |
<
< | Origin, Function, and Use of Grindr: | | | | |
<
< | Grindr is a smartphone application that utilizes GPS technology to locate other gay men that are in proximity – regardless of your geographic location. Since launching in 2009, the app has been downloaded over 10 million times, is available in 192 countries, and has more than 2.6 million users that have collectively exchanged more than 70 million chat messages. Over the past 15 years, Grindr has quickly grown into the world’s largest social networking app for gay, bisexual, trans, and queer people. The app is not limited to men who are “out of the closet”; men who are questioning their sexuality and/or identify as “discreet” or “closeted” can use the app as well. | | | | |
<
< | Each Grindr user has a profile with personal information, focusing on physical features like their height, weight, ethnicity, and body type. A user’s profile also displays their relationship status, current HIV status, and their “tribe”. A tribe is a filter that lets users identify themselves with a specific group within the gay community like clean-cut, twink, bear, and geek. These preferences let users specify their searches and find their preferred type of man. These features let men easily find what they are looking for, but they also contribute to the app’s overtly sexual nature since the filtering is done primarily by physical preference. | >
> | Introduction: | | | | |
<
< | How Grindr Perpetuates Gay Stereotypes | | | | |
<
< | Outside and even within the LGBT community, there’s an inaccurate but established stereotype that queer men are more promiscuous and heavily active in today’s “hook-up culture.” Hook-up culture both encourages and normalizes sexual encounters without a long-term commitment or emotional attachment. Grindr and its users have created its own culture of hooking up. And individuals outside of the LGBT community are already apt to believe that gay men have higher levels of casual sex – especially after 1980s HIV/AIDS epidemic which initiated a great deal of the gay, sexual stereotypes that exist today. | | | | |
<
< | However, not every gay or bisexual man is sexually active, let alone sexually promiscuous, which disproves the largest misconception behind these stereotypes. Though, gay, bisexual, and queen men’s actual use for Grindr further pushes this inaccurate stereotype when the app’s societal influence could instead be used to shatter this myth. Grindr also has some additional features that seem to inadvertently encourage casual sex amongst its users. For example, the instant messaging feature helps in creating Grindr’s hook up culture. In their messages, users can send pictures that tend to go beyond the typical selfie and are usually sexually explicit. The slang popularized by Grindr messaging has also helped in forming the app’s culture of casual sex. Some of the lingo is words like “host”, which is asking if the individual can host the sex partner(s) at his home or “safe”, a way to see if the person wants to use a condom or another safe sex method. At the end of the day, the frequent and popular use of Grindr and its features have allowed a culture of hooking up to permeate the LGBT community and thrive. The fact that the app is mostly used exclusively for casual sexual behaviors inaccurately implies that homosexual men are more promiscuous. | >
> | Despite its economic success, Singapore’s issues with media freedom highlight a glaring problem with the island-nation’s rapid development. In 2024, Singapore ranked 126th out of 180 nations in Reporters without Borders (RSF) Press Freedom Index. One legal tool instrumental to this ranking is the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA). | | | | |
<
< | The Issue and What the App Should Do: | | | | |
<
< | While Grindr has created easy access for meeting gay men in the area, it has simultaneously made obtaining long-term relationship more challenging. The possibilities of a relationship typically seem promising for users as the application provides such easy access to other men who are nearby. However, due to the popular use of Grindr to find casual sex, a great deal of men has found that these meetings don’t really go anywhere and that the app is inefficient means for finding a relationship, leaving those craving a long-term relationship extremely disappointed. | >
> | History of POFMA | | | | |
<
< | Grindr certainly has revolutionized physical interaction among gay men as it allows them to easily filter through and find sexual partners. Although Grindr serves to connect gay men with one another, its actual use goes beyond a networking outlet to an app with a thriving culture of casual sex. This reality further strengthens the social belief that exists both inside and outside of the LGBT community that homosexual men are hypersexual and promiscuous. To a certain extent, Grindr does pose benefits for the gay community as it truly does connect gay, bisexual, and queer men with one another. However, the negative social impact and stigma that is associated with the LGBT community continues to exist due to Grindr’s use and popularity does make the app slightly problematic. Even though Simkhai can’t control all of Grindr’s consumers and their intentions for using it, he can control the impact it creates for the rest of the public, and he should consider the implications that his app has for the LGBT community in doing that. There’s a need to eliminate the established stereotypes about gay men that have existed for so long, rather than perpetuate it. | | | | |
>
> | The concept of POFMA was first discussed in Singapore’s Parliament in 2017. Minister of Law K Shanmugan stated that misinformation was an issue in Singapore for which current laws offered “limited remedies”. Shanmugan cited cases where misinformation had interfered with political and international affairs, stating that fake news must be assumed to be an “offensive weapon by foreign agencies and foreign governments” with the objective of getting “into the public mind, to destabilise the public, to psychologically weaken them”. | | | | |
<
< | Sources:
“About Grindr.” App - Privacy Policy, www.grindr.com/about/. | >
> | In 2019, POFMA was first tabled in Parliament. The stated objective of the Act was “to prevent the electronic communication in Singapore of false statements of fact, to suppress support for and counteract the effects of such communication, to safeguard against the use of online accounts for such communication and for information manipulation, to enable measures to be taken to enhance transparency of online political advertisements, and for related matters”. | | | | |
<
< | Beck, Julie. “The Rise of Dating-App Fatigue.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 27 Oct. 2016, www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/10/the-unbearable-exhaustion-of-dating-apps/505184/. | >
> | Notably, the ruling People’s Action Party held a supermajority in Parliament. As such, following a straightforward voting process, POFMA passed with 72 to 8 votes – all 8 opposition Members of Parliament voted against the Act. | | | | |
<
< | Engle, Clyde. “10 Things I Learned About Gay Hook-Up Culture From My Day On Grindr.” Elite Daily, Elite Daily, 17 Dec. 2018, www.elitedaily.com/dating/gay-hook-up-culture-grindr/1354315 | | | | |
<
< | Salemo, Robert. “Twenty Questions for Grindr Creator Joel Simkhai.” Xtra, 28 July 2011, www.dailyxtra.com/twenty-questions-for-grindr-creator-joel-simkhai-33729 | >
> | Substance of POFMA | | | | |
<
< | Tadich, Paul. “The IPhone Revolutionized Gay Hookup Culture.” Motherboard, VICE, 27 June 2017, www.motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/bj84b8/iphone-anniversary-grindr-gay-hookup-culture | >
> | The primary tool of POFMA is the ability for online statements to be issued with “directions”. POFMA is operated by an agency within the Infocomm Media Development Authority in Singapore, which is a statutory board established under the Singapore Ministry of Digital Development and Information.
A “correction direction” does not necessarily require an online statement to be removed, instead the direction will state the necessary adjustment that must be made to ‘correct’ the false statement. However, in more “serious” cases, a “stop communication” or “disabling” direction may be issued instead. Stop communication directions instruct the statement-maker to remove access to the false statement within a specified time. A disabling direction disables access to an entire online site in Singapore. Supposedly, directions can only be issued if “a false statement of fact has been or is being communicated in Singapore through the Internet; and it is in the public interest to issue the direction”. Non-compliance with POFMA directions result in fines and/or jail time for offenders.
POFMA orders are subject to judicial review if offenders wish to appeal. In Online Citizen, the Singapore Court of Appeal established a five-step framework to determine if a POFMA correction direction should be set aside in a judicial review process. The Online Citizen Pte Ltd v Attorney-General [2021] SGCA 96. Firstly, the reviewing court must identify the false statement targeted by the direction. Secondly, the court must determine if the POFMA-wielding minister’s interpretation of the statement is reasonably objective. Thirdly, the court must determine if the statement is indeed a “statement of fact”, and not merely an opinion. Fourthly, the court must determine if the statement is indeed “false”. Finally, the court must consider if the statement has been or is being communicated in Singapore. The Court also established that the burden of proof lies with the POFMA offender – adding another hurdle to avoiding liability under POFMA. Notably, the POFMA appeal process remains financially and administratively burdensome.
Assessing the effects of POFMA
POFMA has been deployed against rival political parties such as the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) and small, independent alternative media outlets such as Jom Media. As often seen in these cases, the resource imbalance between the POFMA user and POFMA offender is massive. As such, a POFMA direction can be seen as a crushing blow to the operability and credibility of alternative media sources or opposition political parties.
One central concern about POFMA is the Act’s likely effect in stifling legitimate political discourse. The substantive legal language in POFMA and POFMA’s appeal process is arguably vague and relatively broad. For instance, what is seen to be in the “public interest” ranges from matters of public health, national security, and the maintenance of public confidence in governmental institutions. It is thus likely that media actors in Singapore will develop a culture of self-censorship in order to play the safe side in complying with POFMA, given the onerous nature of being issued with POFMA directions. The threat of POFMA alone is likely to act as a deterrent in publishing alternative, diverse viewpoints on a range of public issues in Singapore, contributing to the development of a one-track political discourse culture.
Conclusion
Singapore’s implementation of POFMA highlights a difficult balancing act between the safeguarding against misinformation and preservation of a fundamental freedom of expression. The broad powers wielded by the government in POFMA along with the difficulty of accessing judicial oversight poses serious questions to media freedom in Singapore. The international condemnation and scrutiny surrounding POFMA underscores the importance of transparency and accountability in checking governmental power. The rise of POFMA raises questions around the direction of Singapore’s meteoric development in the digital information age – as the country matures into a true first-world nation, it must address how much it believes in democratic principles and media freedom.
Sources cited:
https://rsf.org/en/country/singapore
https://web.archive.org/web/20180927125021/https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/government--seriously-considering--how-to-deal-with-fake-news-sh-8712436
https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/POFMA2019?TransactionDate=20191001235959
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/falsehoods-freedom-speech-and-burden-proof-key-findings-apex-courts-landmark-pofma-judgment-2230541 |
|