A few interesting pieces have appeared in The Straits Times recently. I refer, in particular, to NMP Simon Tay's highly enagaging piece entitled "What do S'poreans want? Nanny states and markets" (ST, Apr 7), M. Nirmala's report on Singapore's education system based on the research findings of British education expert, Professor Andy Green (ST, Apr 18), and, of course, Asad Latif's account of the parliamentary debate surrounding the Singapore Broadcasting Authority (Amendment) Bill (ST, April 20). NMP Tay, a strong advocate of a non-state and people-led civil society, questions the maturity of Singaporeans in being able to fend for themselves. According to him, self-regulation is the sine qua non of self-responsibility, and thus of weaning Singaporeans off the 'nanny'.

The nature of the media industry makes it one of the best illustrations of self-regulation, yet Singapore media seems to be moving towards the opposite direction. The official rationale for the recently passed Singapore Broadcasting Authority (Amendment) Bill is that foreign media players have no right to participate in Singapore politics. This argument makes complete sense if we consider all political decisions as affecting Singaporeans only within the geographical confines of tiny Singapore. Unfortunately, this is not the case. It negates the fact that there is now a loosely termed 'Singaporean diaspora' scattered to all four corners of the globe.

Indeed, not too long ago, we were declared the most globalised city in the world. Most Singaporeans, I would like to believe, have acquired some degree of media literacy. We are no longer as naive or stupid to believe everything we read and see on media(ted) texts and screens. Rules which threaten to block or filter information - however critical or plain wrong - can only weaken our abilities to tell right from wrong, truth from lies, even political manipulation from genuine intents. In short, with good old 'nanny' still providing for us, we cannot fully mature as a people and as a nation.

Media laws and policies are, willy-nilly, excellent tools to gauge the maturity of a nation. How we frame them can have severe long-term repercussions. Already, we are warned that Singapore's current education system of 'managed creativity' rather than creativity of the entrepreneurial kind may not serve us well in(to) the future (M. Nirmala, ST, Apr 18). As far as I am concerned, 'managed creativity' is as good (or as bad) as 'enlightened conformity', which is where the recent amendment to the SBA Act is headed towards. These three seemingly disparate news items have one thing in common: they suggest we have a long way to go before we can shake off the not-too-complimentary 'Nanny State' label. For the sake of Singapore's future, I hope we do - preferably sooner rather than when it is too late.