Xiaxue vs SMRT: a closer look at cyberbullying
The Harrassment Act came into effect in Singapore on 15th November 2014 and the first Protection Order was successfully filed against an anonymous entity called SMRT Ltd Feedback by Singapore's top blogger Xiaxue. You can read the juice on Xiaxue's blog here.
I'm not going to mince my words here: I'm ticked off by the stupidity of the comments that have sprung up with regard to this issue. Most of the people on SMRT's side have somehow come up with the idea that Xiaxue deserves all the hate, death threats and continuous (they've been going on since 2012) harrassment she has received simply because she has done the same to others before. I'm going to address the issue of bullying and victim blaming today.
Blogger Limpehft has addressed the topic previously on his blog in a way more eloquent manner than I will today. His blog is a good read, do check out his post :) But I'm going to offer my point of view today by tackling 5 myths about SMRT's cyberbullying.
1. What is harrassment?
The Protection from Harrassment Act states that (taken from Drew and Napier LLC):
"the Act will extend the scope of existing laws against harassment and related anti-social behaviours by stipulating that harassment and stalking include acts that are committed in the real world as well as online and extends to threatening, abusive or insulting words, behaviour or communication made “by any means”. Examples of acts that would constitute harassment include: cyber bullying, bullying in schools and harassment in the workplace"
There is no disputing that SMRT Ltd Feedback is indeed guilty of all the above in bold. Check Xiaxue's blog for all the evidence she has compiled since 2012. And mind you, I can attest to the fact that those were not the only bullying comments made towards her.
Under the section of "Unlawful stalking",
"The Act will create a new offence of unlawful stalking. Under the Act, a person (the accused person) unlawfully stalks another person (the victim) if the accused person engages in a course of conduct which:
(a) involves acts or omissions associated with stalking;
(b) causes harassment, alarm or distress to the victim;
(c) the accused person: (i) intends to cause harassment, alarm or distress to the victim; or (ii) knows or ought reasonably to know that the acts or omissions are likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to the victim."
SMRT has been a platform for numerous third-party attacks, including threats of bodily harm and release of personal information like her address, targeting not only her but the safety of her husband and her family. I guess every reasonable person can agree that the extent of abuse she has received from SMRT and/or its supporters have given her enough cause for "alarm or distress".
So yes, SMRT is definitely guilty under the eyes of the law. The law agrees with me on this point because the Protection Order would not have been issued otherwise. Fair?
But Xiaxue is guilty of cyberbullying too, SMRT supporters wail. This I will address in point 3.
2. SMRT Ltd Feedback is not the culprit of the death threats.
When SMRT Ltd started playing hero on behalf of Singaporeans and decided to take revenge on Jover Chew by rallying thousands of Singaporeans to send pizzas to his home address,
- they KNEW exactly the extent of influence they had over Singaporeans.
- they KNEW they were anonymous and couldn't possibly be taken to task by the law.
Yes, so they were not the direct culprits of the death threats. But were they guilty of instigating this, somewhat? When SMRT started the tirade against Xiaxue they KNEW that they would be attracting a lot of commentators who hated Xiaxue. They knew the exactly what they were doing- they wanted to make her feel bad with their hordes of supporters.
On their numerous posts back in Dec 2014, they not only did not draw the line at the bullying comments, they TOOK PART in making these bullying comments themselves.
Are they really "against people who use the page as an avenue for bodily harm", as they so righteously claimed? If they are, can they kindly explain the comments with threats of violence towards Xiaxue on their page? Screenshots can be found on Xiaxue's blog.
3. What about Dawn Yang, Yan Kaykay and the numerous men of whose photos she had posted on her blog?
Like Xiaxue mentioned on her blog- she is not anonymous and she can be held accountable for her actions. I also don't agree with what she did to Dawn Yang, and I don't agree with her alleging that Yan Kay Kay bought Youtube followers when she had no solid proof. But she can be taken to task with the things she says because Dawn and Kaykay can also file a Protection Order against her if they want to. Yet, the fact remains that they didn't. If you want to cry that this is unfair, ask Dawn and Kaykay why they did not take action. Not blame Xiaxue for taking action when she has serious cause for concern for the safety of her family.
Secondly, I can't imagine why so many people are still harping on the fact that she exposed a couple of cyberbullies 3 years ago when they made sexual and degrading comments about her and friends during a PAP rally. I shall reproduce the blog post here.
At no point in the blog entry did Xiaxue reveal the addresses and contact numbers of the men in the photos. The screenshot I took above shows a stark contrast between SMRT and Xiaxue- the difference between them, is that she is aware of the influence she has and the consequences of it should she allow her blog to become a platform for real-life harrassment. I'm sure I can say that neither Dawn Yang, Yan Kay Kay nor the men in her blog post have any reason to fear for the safety of the families.
So no, you can't say Xiaxue deserves all of it because she has done exactly the same thing to others before because they are not the same thing. Xiaxue did not make childish insults towards anyone CONSTANTLY for 3 years and she certainly did not allow people to post anyone's personal details on her blog/page.
4. If Xiaxue did not want her child to be cyberbullied then she should not have exposed her child to public scrutiny in the first place.
It is not a crime for parents to expose their children to the public (especially when raising a child is tough and sponsorships help give the child as comfortable a lifestyle as possible). It is, however, morally wrong to pick on an innocent child no matter how much you hate its parents. No matter how much you think Xiaxue deserves the flak she's getting for all she's done in her past, you have an issue with her, pick on her. NOT ON HER CHILD.
The followers of SMRT Ltd Feedback have gone over to Xiaxue's page and called her baby ugly and all kinds of nasty names. She has since deleted the comments, but I'd like to think you're the crowd that you attract (i.e. SMRT attracts supporters who are willing to stoop this low as to attack a child).
5. SMRT would never attack someone who is innocent.
"Beyond our childish insults, have faith in knowing that at the end of the day, we fight the right fight," the hypocrite says.
What's this?
My motives for writing this blog post despite the possible ramifications only boil down to one thing: I am against cyberbullying of any form.
When Xiaxue cyberbullies, yes it is wrong. I personally would not have picked on Dawn Yang or Yan Kay Kay in the first place. I agree that she may have only made 1 or 2 posts with reference to them and yet the damage done to them was bad enough.
However, using "she also cyberbullies and I want to teach her a lesson!" as an excuse to abet death threats and harrassing behaviour over the course of 3 years is not only hypocritical, it is cowardly. For most cyberbullies, they hit once or twice, the issue blows over. For SMRT? It definitely sounds like something way more sinister.
I'm writing this because I'm strongly against the culture of cyberbullying in Singapore and it makes me sad to see that it is so widely celebrated by people I even call my friends. No, you're not internet vigilantes, you're not a "troll" or "satire" page. You are a bunch of cowards who don't know the difference between righteousness and childishness.
Stop supporting bullying behaviour, and stop standing on the side of bullies. Call it out and take a firm stand against it.
P.S. I don't have a popular blog, but I'm not afraid to voice out against SMRT and their bullying tactics. I am aware of how low they can stoop should they target me, but I believe that I have nothing to fear. They are already in trouble with the law, they can continue harrassing people if they dare.
I'm not going to mince my words here: I'm ticked off by the stupidity of the comments that have sprung up with regard to this issue. Most of the people on SMRT's side have somehow come up with the idea that Xiaxue deserves all the hate, death threats and continuous (they've been going on since 2012) harrassment she has received simply because she has done the same to others before. I'm going to address the issue of bullying and victim blaming today.
Blogger Limpehft has addressed the topic previously on his blog in a way more eloquent manner than I will today. His blog is a good read, do check out his post :) But I'm going to offer my point of view today by tackling 5 myths about SMRT's cyberbullying.
1. What is harrassment?
The Protection from Harrassment Act states that (taken from Drew and Napier LLC):
"the Act will extend the scope of existing laws against harassment and related anti-social behaviours by stipulating that harassment and stalking include acts that are committed in the real world as well as online and extends to threatening, abusive or insulting words, behaviour or communication made “by any means”. Examples of acts that would constitute harassment include: cyber bullying, bullying in schools and harassment in the workplace"
There is no disputing that SMRT Ltd Feedback is indeed guilty of all the above in bold. Check Xiaxue's blog for all the evidence she has compiled since 2012. And mind you, I can attest to the fact that those were not the only bullying comments made towards her.
Under the section of "Unlawful stalking",
"The Act will create a new offence of unlawful stalking. Under the Act, a person (the accused person) unlawfully stalks another person (the victim) if the accused person engages in a course of conduct which:
(a) involves acts or omissions associated with stalking;
(b) causes harassment, alarm or distress to the victim;
(c) the accused person: (i) intends to cause harassment, alarm or distress to the victim; or (ii) knows or ought reasonably to know that the acts or omissions are likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to the victim."
SMRT has been a platform for numerous third-party attacks, including threats of bodily harm and release of personal information like her address, targeting not only her but the safety of her husband and her family. I guess every reasonable person can agree that the extent of abuse she has received from SMRT and/or its supporters have given her enough cause for "alarm or distress".
So yes, SMRT is definitely guilty under the eyes of the law. The law agrees with me on this point because the Protection Order would not have been issued otherwise. Fair?
But Xiaxue is guilty of cyberbullying too, SMRT supporters wail. This I will address in point 3.
2. SMRT Ltd Feedback is not the culprit of the death threats.
If you're against them, why didn't you delete the comments or stop them?
When SMRT Ltd started playing hero on behalf of Singaporeans and decided to take revenge on Jover Chew by rallying thousands of Singaporeans to send pizzas to his home address,
- they KNEW exactly the extent of influence they had over Singaporeans.
- they KNEW they were anonymous and couldn't possibly be taken to task by the law.
Yes, so they were not the direct culprits of the death threats. But were they guilty of instigating this, somewhat? When SMRT started the tirade against Xiaxue they KNEW that they would be attracting a lot of commentators who hated Xiaxue. They knew the exactly what they were doing- they wanted to make her feel bad with their hordes of supporters.
On their numerous posts back in Dec 2014, they not only did not draw the line at the bullying comments, they TOOK PART in making these bullying comments themselves.
Are they really "against people who use the page as an avenue for bodily harm", as they so righteously claimed? If they are, can they kindly explain the comments with threats of violence towards Xiaxue on their page? Screenshots can be found on Xiaxue's blog.
3. What about Dawn Yang, Yan Kaykay and the numerous men of whose photos she had posted on her blog?
Like Xiaxue mentioned on her blog- she is not anonymous and she can be held accountable for her actions. I also don't agree with what she did to Dawn Yang, and I don't agree with her alleging that Yan Kay Kay bought Youtube followers when she had no solid proof. But she can be taken to task with the things she says because Dawn and Kaykay can also file a Protection Order against her if they want to. Yet, the fact remains that they didn't. If you want to cry that this is unfair, ask Dawn and Kaykay why they did not take action. Not blame Xiaxue for taking action when she has serious cause for concern for the safety of her family.
Secondly, I can't imagine why so many people are still harping on the fact that she exposed a couple of cyberbullies 3 years ago when they made sexual and degrading comments about her and friends during a PAP rally. I shall reproduce the blog post here.
So no, you can't say Xiaxue deserves all of it because she has done exactly the same thing to others before because they are not the same thing. Xiaxue did not make childish insults towards anyone CONSTANTLY for 3 years and she certainly did not allow people to post anyone's personal details on her blog/page.
4. If Xiaxue did not want her child to be cyberbullied then she should not have exposed her child to public scrutiny in the first place.
It is not a crime for parents to expose their children to the public (especially when raising a child is tough and sponsorships help give the child as comfortable a lifestyle as possible). It is, however, morally wrong to pick on an innocent child no matter how much you hate its parents. No matter how much you think Xiaxue deserves the flak she's getting for all she's done in her past, you have an issue with her, pick on her. NOT ON HER CHILD.
The followers of SMRT Ltd Feedback have gone over to Xiaxue's page and called her baby ugly and all kinds of nasty names. She has since deleted the comments, but I'd like to think you're the crowd that you attract (i.e. SMRT attracts supporters who are willing to stoop this low as to attack a child).
5. SMRT would never attack someone who is innocent.
"Beyond our childish insults, have faith in knowing that at the end of the day, we fight the right fight," the hypocrite says.
What's this?
Attacking Rozz because Rozz murdered a young child to deserve all these I presume?
They may have deleted the above post, but I can still access the cache. Cyberbullying Chief of Defence Force who was guilty of the heinous crime of... oh I don't know, completing the Combat Skills Course at 45 to understand what his men are going through on the ground???? I'd like to hear what "right fight" SMRT thought they were fighting when picking on innocent people.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When Xiaxue cyberbullies, yes it is wrong. I personally would not have picked on Dawn Yang or Yan Kay Kay in the first place. I agree that she may have only made 1 or 2 posts with reference to them and yet the damage done to them was bad enough.
However, using "she also cyberbullies and I want to teach her a lesson!" as an excuse to abet death threats and harrassing behaviour over the course of 3 years is not only hypocritical, it is cowardly. For most cyberbullies, they hit once or twice, the issue blows over. For SMRT? It definitely sounds like something way more sinister.
I'm writing this because I'm strongly against the culture of cyberbullying in Singapore and it makes me sad to see that it is so widely celebrated by people I even call my friends. No, you're not internet vigilantes, you're not a "troll" or "satire" page. You are a bunch of cowards who don't know the difference between righteousness and childishness.
Stop supporting bullying behaviour, and stop standing on the side of bullies. Call it out and take a firm stand against it.
Photo credit to limpehft.blogspot.co.uk
P.S. I don't have a popular blog, but I'm not afraid to voice out against SMRT and their bullying tactics. I am aware of how low they can stoop should they target me, but I believe that I have nothing to fear. They are already in trouble with the law, they can continue harrassing people if they dare.
Comments
Post a Comment