To what extent does social media pose a challenge for the government?

Social media is being used in unprecedented ways today. While it has helped people to communicate from across the world. It is also an important tool in influencing thoughts and ideas of people. People today can use social media to share all sorts of information to a larger and wider audience. While that is beneficial in some instances, from a governmental perspective, it can pose a challenge. This is because social media can spread misinformation that can lead to social discord. Thus, it can be said that social media poses serious challenges for governments because the government has little control over social media platforms.

Social media is an unregulated platform with widespread reach which is a serious challenge for the governments.  Today, billions of people use the internet and have access to social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook and Instagram. All these platforms display information that can influence people to a large extent. Currently, there are no laws that are meant to regulate these platforms. Governments believe these platforms are very popular and have a massive outreach which directly influences people. For example, during the Arab Spring social media played an instrumental role in spreading awareness. Recently, a US teenager’s TikTok video went viral about the Muslims being put under concentration camps, the video raised awareness about the treatment of Uighur Muslims. Though social media in these instances has often exposed the role of authoritarian governments. There is no denying that governments of these countries have faced immense challenges in controlling these platforms. This is evident from the fact that even after placing bans on Facebook and Instagram in countries like China, people have found workarounds and use Virtual Private Networks (VPN) to access these platforms. Thus, social media poses a serious challenge for governments who want to establish dominance over its people.

Social media use does not lead to mass revolt, but it could still pose a challenge as an arena in which dangerous ideas circulate. Social media has been used by various terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda and Lashkar-E-Taiba in the past. In recent times, ISIS is fighting an online cyberwar, with the use of violent videos, online messages of hate and aim to radicalise and create a new generation of cyber jihadists. Similarly, the Christchurch shootings were orchestrated for the media and spread the message of fear among the masses. Apart from terrorist activities, social media poses a challenge in the form of international governments who try to intervene on internal matters of a country. An example of this is China, which used platforms like LinkedIn to recruit spies in the US. Similarly, Pakistan is known to use social media against India in multiple instances. Leading media houses uncovered propaganda run by Pakistan on social media against PM Modi hours before his crucial meeting with Chinese premier Xi Jinping. All these examples illustrate how social media can be misused to spread misinformation and messages of violence.  Therefore, unregulated social media poses a huge challenge for governments as dangerous information circulates widely.

However, in rare instances, social media can also be beneficial to governments which minimise the challenges posed. Social media can be used by governments to interact with people directly during a crisis. An example of this can be the recent outbreak of coronavirus, where governments have tried to use social media to try and reduce panic and mitigate misinformation. Effective use of social media was seen by Singapore, where anxiety and panic of citizens were reduced by updating citizens regularly via social media. When the disease level was raised to orange and citizens began hoarding groceries, the government was quick in trying to reassure and calm citizens. However, despite the attempts, people have not stopped panicking or believing rumours. This is evident from the fact that citizens have used social media to express veiled criticism of government mismanagement and lack of government accountability. Social media now acts as a check and balance against the government. With the use of social media even honest and genuine efforts by the governments can be undermined. Therefore, social media ultimately poses a challenge and is largely a necessary evil that has to be managed.

In conclusion, social media is largely a challenge to the government because it cannot be easily regulated. While laws and policies exist to manage social media, enforcement is often impossible due to anonymity as well as how quickly messages are spread. Though the benefits of social media cannot be denied, from a governmental perspective social media poses serious challenges and is a threat to the government bodies.

Is it possible for your society to be fair and inclusive?

Singapore is known as a multi-cultural society. It is believed society is fair when people are judged on their abilities and efforts rather than factors like race and religion. Inclusiveness in a society means that all members of society benefit from progress and development. It also means that all people have opportunities to do well and raise their status. Diversity is celebrated and respected in an inclusive society. In these terms then, Singapore is a pretty fair and inclusive society.

The Singapore government adopts policies that benefit all. The government understands that all people regardless of race, religion, gender and age have something to contribute to the nation. The annual budget plan of the Singapore government generally focuses on creating neighbourhoods and transport systems which are elder-friendly. Apart from that, the government also has adopted GST vouchers that help in uplifting people from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Similarly, healthcare has integrated and streamlined to make it more affordable. Singaporeans also come together to celebrate various festivities. The Chinese host open houses during Chinese New Year, as do Indians for Deepavali. On the political front, chief-of-army, ministerial positions as well as heads of state have been graced by minorities. Thus, Singapore tries to be fair and inclusive by introducing policies that benefit all and appoint leaders based on meritocracy.

Singapore also ensures inclusivity and fairness in its educational system. The government has ensured that the education system is affordable for all. Educational policies ensure that everyone in society progresses and tries its best to prevent social exclusion. The education system also ensures that it better integrates the learning needs of the students. The government tries its best to ensure that no child is excluded from basic education that provides them with literacy and numeracy skills. Even prisoners have access to education and can complete Cambridge exams while serving time. Increasingly, disabled children are also integrated with peers from regular school systems. Thus, there is inclusiveness and fairness in education systems in Singaporean society.

However, despite the educational policies of the government, educational systems continue to create a divide within society. Educational systems tend to be unfair when rich parents are able to afford tuition and extra classes for their children. This educational disparity creates a rift between the rich and the poor. Nevertheless, self-help groups do exist to provide extra classes outside of school hours to those that need it.  It is also easily observable that only a small proportion of people with disabilities are employed and many face discrimination in the workplace. Those above 45 also have trouble finding jobs in Singapore as foreign workers are often favoured over locals. No society is perfect, but Singapore tries its best to ensure no one is left behind.

The Singapore pledge reminds people about the idea of equality. Thus, it can be said that Singapore in many ways is a society which welcomes and accepts people from all walks of life regardless of their differences. Thus, it possible to have a fair and inclusive society in Singapore when people actively practice it in their daily lives. It is surely possible to have a fair and inclusive society in Singapore, by the implementation of government policies, education, and awareness on an individual level.

Television is detrimental to our ability to think critically. Discuss.

There is no denying that television has entertained us and educated us. Many consider it essential to the development of mass media. However, there are others who believe that television affects our critical thinking. Critical thinking is the ability to look at things from various perspectives to reach a balanced conclusion.  When people watch television, they passively absorb the information without questioning its reliability. Thus, in this sense, it can be contended that television is detrimental to our ability to think critically.

Television is responsible for showing information that is biased in nature. Television is responsible for portraying reality from only one perspective. This is particularly true in today’s society where people are surrounded by fake news or half-truths. For example, in the United States, the Fox News Channel has been taken to task for practising biased reporting by favouring Republican Party and portraying the Democratic Party in a negative light. The biased reporting of can be detrimental to the integrity of news and can also affect the thinking ability of the people. Another case in point is China. China’s state-sponsored channel, CGTN, has been under investigation by the United Kingdom for only representing the point of view of the Communist Party of China. Biased news on TV has the ability to inhibit our critical thinking, especially when everything is accepted without question. Thus, television affects our ability to think critically as it shows a biased perspective.

[The paragraph does not answer how critical thinking is impacted. Rather than focusing on giving two examples, it would be better to show how the ability to make good choices is impacted.]

People are influenced by celebrities who they see on TV channels. Many people are obsessed with celebrities and try to follow whatever their idols do. When celebrities give their opinion on a matter or promote products or causes, their fans are bound to follow their advice. For example, Pierce Bronson received a lot of flak for promoting a mouth freshener which was deemed carcinogenic in nature. This was due to the fact that celebrities’ influences consumer choices as they believe everything that they say. The popularity of shows like Dr.Phil, Dr.Oz and The Oprah Show is a testament to the fact that celebrities on TV have the power to influence people. Therefore, television is detrimental to thinking critically by both inviting an erosion of critical thinking and promoting what is popular rather than what is true.

[Still not answering the question. The paragraph does not show the key terms in the last sentence].

Television is also responsible for presenting reality in an oversimplified way and promoting violence. Many people view television and accept that as reality, television has the power to influence the world view of people. For example, shows like Criminal Minds, Grey’s Anatomy and Station 19 do not depict accurately portray the life of a policeman, FBI agent, doctor or a firefighter. Watching these shows does not enable critical thinking as they cause disillusionment and unrealistic expectations. Shows like are aired in a time span of 30-60 minutes but in the process, people form opinions without allowing the information to first be filtered through their minds. Furthermore, violent tv shows impact rational thinking in young people. For example, Dexter, a tv show about a serial killer inspired Mark Twitchell to commit first-degree murder. Similarly, a teenager obsessed with TV killer Dexter stabbed and dismembered his girlfriend. These examples illustrate that watching crime shows can lead to irrational thoughts and also lead to violent behaviour. Therefore, television is detrimental to thinking critically because it portrays reality in a less accurate way and also encourages people to act irrationally on impulse.

[Still not answering the question. The paragraph does not show the key terms in the last sentence. Mark Twitchell is an isolated example].

Despite its flaws, it cannot be denied that television, if used in a proper manner, can enable critical thinking. Documentaries on channels like National Geographic and Discovery enable critical thinking in people. Moreover, unbiased news channels like Channel News Asia and PBS present facts that showcase reality from various perspectives. Moreover, topical debate shows like Question Time on BBC enables audiences to listen to various opinions and form one of their own. Such shows enable people to form their opinions through critical thinking and not being influenced by reporters or celebrities. Therefore, watching correct forms of media can help people thinking critically.

In conclusion, television to a large extent is detrimental to critical thinking. However, to enable critical thinking people to need to be more careful about what they want to consume on television. If they choose to watch some violent show instead of an informative documentary, we cannot blame the television but the choice of the audience. Therefore, the audience is responsible for enabling critical thinking by discerning what to watch and what not to watch.

[Unfortunately, this essay is largely NAQ. Grammar fluctuates between third person, and first-person plural.]