.LIFT BAN ON SATELLITE DISHES
18 January 1998
Dear Editor
LIFT BAN ON SATELLITE DISHES
In the light of the report that Singapore Cable Vision is likely to
charge landed homes about $1000 for a cable connection (ST, 16
December 1997), I urge the Government to lift its ban on direct
access by private individuals to satellite television broadcasts.
The exorbitance of SCV's anticipated fee is apparent when we
consider the fact that a Dish Network 3000 Standard Satellite
Television System in the United States costs only US$149 (see
http://www.dss1.com/dishnet.htm), or about one-quarter the
projected cost of a SCV connection at the current exchange rate.
Moreover, there is no reason for the Government to maintain the ban
on satellite television.
To begin with, the satellite receiver comes with a high-speed data
port that can be connected to the Internet. This puts it on par with
cable's access to the Internet. Homes without a cable connection
could obtain access to Singapore ONE through the existing telephone
connection. Although current technology gives cable a speed
advantage over the telephone line, Singaporean consumers may
decide that speed does not justify the extra premium on cable. In
that case, a satellite system would be fine.
The concern that a satellite dish would be an eyesore is obviated by
the small size of the dish: only 46 centimetres in diameter. A satellite
dish is arguably less unsightly than large and spindly television
antennae.
Then there is the curious argument that cable removes the need for
satellite television. If there were truly no need for satellite
television, there would be no demand, which means no need for a
ban. In any case, the question of need can be settled by the
Singaporean consumer, and does not justify a governmental fiat. If
the government is serious about getting us to think for ourselves
rather than relying on the people at the top to do all the thinking, it
would do well to let us decide whether cable or satellite suits us better.
The anxiety about children obtaining access to inappropriate
programmes has been allayed by the inclusion of a micro-chip that
controls access based on ratings. Worries about pornography
becoming readily available are also unfounded. Pornographic
channels are not free, which makes it unlikely that children will be
accidentally exposed to smut. In fact, children are more likely to
come across pornography on the Internet than on satellite television.
Lifting the ban on satellite television would mean that there is no
need for SCV to incur the expense of cabling every single home. It
would save Singaporean consumers a tidy sum by making available a
much cheaper alternative to cable television. Therefore, unless the
government has a convincing justification for maintaining the ban on
satellite television, it should not create a situation in which landed
home-owners have to fork out four times more money than is
necessary for greater viewing choices.
Yours sincerely
_____________________
Chong Fu Shin Francis
==========================================
A private citizen comments on Francis' letter:
Implications of satellite TV need to be examined
I REFER to Mr Chong Fu Shin's letter "Why ban satellite
television?" (ST, Jan 20).
While I am personally thrilled at the prospect of watching
satellite television in Singapore, there are certain technical
flaws in the writer's argument, social, political and regulatory
framework issues notwithstanding.
Although satellite dishes can now be obtained cheaply, these
particular dishes are designed only to receive signals from
special high-powered satellites.
For such dishes to become viable in Singapore, the Government
would either have to launch its own satellite, or enter into a
commercial venture.
Such a move far outweighs the existing cabling project in terms of
infrastructure cost, and can only be a future possibility.
As for high-speed Internet access, the digital satellite system
allows for only one-way communication. Downloads come at high
speeds through the dish, but uploads still go through the
conventional telephone line.
Unless satellite transmission technology advances and
miniaturises, Internet users will find such a system highly
restrictive.
Singapore is a small country and satellite broadcasts have only
just begun to filter into homes here. I would suggest, in such a
situation, that delivery methods of satellite TV channels be
limited so as to avoid confusion.
Furthermore, there are many implications, not just those
pertaining to pornography, that need to be examined before
satellite television is allowed in Singapore.
I am sure the authorities would not impede technological
advancement over the need for strict controls.
After all, it is Singapore's desire to be the broadcasting hub of
Asia.
ETHAN RANDALL
=====================================
ST FORUM
6 Feb 98
CABLE AN ALTERNATIVE TO SATELLITE
FRANCIS Chong questioned the wisdom of maintaining the ban on satellite
television, noting that satellite services are cheaper than cable, equally fast for Internet
access, and less likely to be pornographic ('Why ban satellite television?', ST, Jan 20).
Ethan Russell addressed some of his points in his letter 'Implications of satellite TV
need to be examined' (ST, Jan 24).
We are acutely conscious of the difficulties of insulating Singapore society from
negative influences in an increasingly networked world.
Our approach is to attempt to keep out negative influences for as long as we can,
while equipping Singaporeans with the immunity and tools to counter them.
The Government disallowed the installation of satellite dishes in homes for this
reason, to keep out undesirable satellite broadcasts of values and lifestyles that are at odds
with our multiracial and multi-religious society.
At the same time, the Government recognises that the ban on private satellite dishes
will be difficult to enforce eventually, as dishes become smaller and cheaper.
The Government is, however, committed to providing an alternative to satellite
television, through a national cable network, to every office, school and home.
Cable will provide a platform not only for cable TV but also a wide range of
interactive IT applications including Singapore One.
Singapore Cable Vision (SCV) is required by its licence to cable up the whole
island by Jan 1, 2000.
Eighty per cent of HDB estates have been wired up and 40 per cent of private high-
rise apartments. SCV is now going on to wire up private landed properties.
SCV may have to vary its price structure from estate to estate, depending on the
costs involved.
For the pilot exercise in Inglewood and Faber Garden, SCV is charging $980 for
cabling to the kerb, and $180 for the first point to the home.
The Government will work with SCV to provide all homes in Singapore with
affordable access to cable by Jan 1, 2000.
CHEN HWAI LIANG
Assistant Director (Public Affairs)
For Permanent Secretary
Minitry of Information and the Arts
=======================================
FEB 9 1998
A need for satellite TV now to keep abreast of the world
I HAVE been living in Singapore as a permanent resident for some
16 years and have been waiting just as long for more exciting,
interesting and stimulating TV programmes, after coming from
Britain, where there is a wide range of channels from different
providers, including satellite.
When I heard three years ago that Singapore Cable Vision would
cover all of Singapore by the end of 1997, I thought my prayers
were answered, until I learnt from SCV that it may take till the
next millennium to wire up all the private estates.
Meanwhile other Asian countries have stepped ahead of Singapore,
including Malaysia, which once swore that it would never allow
satellite broadcasts.
I spent Chinese New Year in Malaysia and was amazed at the choice
of over 30 channels that are being offered on the satellite
network; all programmes are controlled before being aired, and one
cannot pick up channels other than what the network is offering.
Furthermore, any house can be wired up, regardless of location,
within half an hour.
While I realise that interactive TV will also be useful for video
on demand and shopping etc, and has already been launched in
Hongkong (to somewhat lukewarm response), there is a market NOW
for more worldwide programming, so residents are not cut off from
the rest of the world.
RICHARD FIELD
=================================
FEB 11 1998
Re-evaluate ban on satellite dishes
I REFER to Singapore's current ban on satellite dishes.
Put more specifically, it is a ban on direct broadcasting to
audiences here.
I feel that this ban has to be lifted sooner or later. Satellites
are being used increasingly for civilian purposes and Singapore
should be hot on the heels of such technology.
In the US, the satellite industry is growing at a much faster rate
than that of cable television, according a Wall Street Journal
report. Lifting the ban in Singapore will be in line with our aim
to become a communications hub.
Moreover, digital satellite systems deliver clear pictures with
CD-quality sound.
When Singapore Cable Vision was set up, it was said that there
would be no need for satellite dishes.
However, this reason is not strong enough to justify spending
millions of dollars on the laying of fibre-optic cables.
Cable-laying costs much more than setting up a small satellite
dish, which would be even smaller than a normal television
antenna. In a built-up area like Singapore, cable-laying can be
difficult.
Receiving undesirable material like pornography via satellite is
also difficult, if not impossible.
This is because pornographic channels are not free.
First, one has to possess a special receiver from the broadcasters
to de-scramble the signals. Second, Singapore does not lie within
the area that receives such signals.
These satellites are probably on the other side of the globe.
One would have more luck getting pornography through the buying of
illegal videotapes.
Satellite systems will also be less prone to failure. If a main
cable malfunctions, all homes in the vicinity will not get to
watch anything on their televisions.
For something similar to happen to satellite systems, the
satellite in space would have to malfunction.
This would be highly unlikely.
Lastly, satellite dishes are not unsightly. On the contrary, they
make a neighbourhood look hi-tech.
I hope the relevant authorities will re-evaluate the present ban
on satellite dishes.
Lifting it will allow Singaporeans to learn how to judge and
scrutinise foreign information.
BOK ANN MIN LENNARD
=============================================
30 Bridport Avenue
Singapore 559320
Email:fchong@iseas.edu.sg
Tel: 280-5706
15 February 1998
WHEN WILL SATELLITE DISHES BE LEGAL?
The Ministry of Information and the Arts' defence of the ban on satellite television rests on the quaint assumption that we are incapable of thinking for ourselves where 'negative influences' are concerned ('Cable an alternative to satellite', ST 6 Feb).
MITA says that its 'approach is to attempt to keep out negative influences for as long as [it] can, while equipping Singaporeans with the immunity and tools to counter them'.
Presumably, MITA will legalise satellite dishes once it is satisfied that we have been 'immunised'. I would like MITA to specify the level of immunity we must attain before it will permit us satellite dishes. I also invite MITA to explain how it is implementing the 'vaccination' programme, and to estimate its completion date.
Yours sincerely
Chong Fu Shin Francis
======================================
FEB 19 1998
Satellite dish ban will stay while it is useful
I REFER to the letter by Mr Francis Chong (ST, Feb 17) asking when
the Ministry of Information and the Arts will allow satellite
dishes, and when the "vaccination" programme will be completed.
As I stated in my earlier letter (ST, Feb 6), the ban on satellite
dishes will continue for as long as it is effective and useful.
The ban has bought us time to lay our own cable system, which will
be completed by the end of next year, and to restructure
free-to-air broadcasts in Singapore.
Year by year, we are strengthening local programming. Parents and
teachers are adapting gradually to a more complex broadcast
environment and preparing our children for it.
Alas, our "vaccination" programme will never be complete. Every
human society is confronted with the social and moral challenges
posed by the new multimedia technology. They will take some time,
perhaps more than a generation, to adjust fully to this new
environment. Few societies believe that the effects of the new
technology are wholly for their good, and that complete
laissez-faire is the wisest policy.
CHEN HWAI LIANG Assistant
Director/Public Affairs for Permanent Secretary Ministry of
Information & the Arts
=================================
Straits Times Editorial
FEB 23 1998
Cable vision, not tunnel vision
------------------------------------------------------------------
CABLE television is primarily another channel through which
Singaporeans may gain access to news and entertainment programmes
from around the world. The choice which it offers the consumer is
in keeping with the demands of Singapore as a thriving,
cosmopolitan society. But cable TV enables people to plug into a
whole vibrant world outside while upholding the Government's
desire to protect the mores of a multi-racial and multi-religious
country from unfiltered satellite television programmes. Then, in
a country of highrise buildings, cable not only makes it possible
for subscribers in low-rise structures to receive clearer
programmes but is also a source of protection against attempts to
disrupt or interfere with telecasts. To these factors, each
important in itself and cumulatively making a strong case for
cable TV, there must be added an objective which it serves and
indeed advances. This is the objective of Singapore being an
Intelligent Island, a place where information technology improves
the quality of life at work, at home and at play. Multimedia
services are an essential component of that new world; interactive
television is a case in point. Cable TV has a role to play in
helping Singaporeans feel more comfortable in the new setting, in
which timely access to a wide variety of information is an
intrinsic part of living in a smart environment. Access provides a
beneficial conduit as well to the information economy that is
evolving in the information age.
All this explains the impatience many Singaporeans feel over the
pace of Singapore Cable Vision's efforts to wire up the island.
Yes, SCV has just reiterated its commitment to cabling all
highrise homes by the end of this year, and its licence obliges it
to provide all homes with access to the nationwide cable network
by the end of next year. It must also be noted that barely three
years after the cabling exercise began, more than 600,000 homes,
accounting for 80 per cent of Housing Board flats and 40 per cent
of private highrise dwellings, have been wired up. These are not
negligible achievements but, still, the record is less than
satisfactory when it comes to private estates, on which it has
started work. People in such estates, along with those in
condominiums which have not yet been wired up, have as much of a
right to cable TV as HDB-dwellers do.
The regional monetary turmoil, which touches on Singapore life
across the board, highlights the need to make multi-channel
television, providing frequent news and analysis of unfolding
developments from multiple viewpoints, available to as wide a
group of people as possible. Indeed, SCV acknowledged some time
ago that its experience had shown that condominiums and private
apartments were twice as likely as HDB residents to sign on for
cable TV. This finding must have revealed the importance of
serving these willing customers instead of sticking to a schedule
that emphasised reaching out to Housing Board flats, regardless.
In fact, the company could have anticipated the heavy response
from those in private housing and tailored its schedule
accordingly.
SCV has defended its strategy of moving into HDB estates first in
terms of the penetration rate, along with cost-efficiency and
simplicity. For cable TV to be a business success, it argued, it
needed a 30 per cent penetration rate, which would not be possible
even if all private homes signed up with it, given the Singapore
environment, in which more than 80 per cent are HDB homes. While
profitability is a legitimate concern, there is surely a case for
providing the infrastructure as quickly as possible and recouping
costs over a longer period of time, if this creates a loyal market
which generates higher returns ultimately. Customers waiting
impatiently for cable TV attest to the existence of precisely that
market. Perhaps SCV could reappraise its approach to them and,
without compromising standards, of course, bring forward its
target date for wiring up Singapore.
=======================================
Reader's Letter
FEB 24 1998
Let citizens make own choices
IT IS apparently a sentiment among Singaporeans in places of power
that the general populace needs to "be protected from foreign
influences". This is why satellite dishes, among other things, are
banned. Possibly, those in power are concerned that exposure to
foreign elements may cause the moral values of the citizenry to
degenerate.
This concern for us is laudable. It is also unnecessary. The
programmes we will get on satellite are not likely to be any
different from those we already get on television and in the
movies.
If the Government wishes us not to absorb "Western values" such as
promiscuity, disrespect for authority and insane violence, we
should sever our ties with the West entirely, ban all Western
films and TV programmes and adopt an insular policy, as North
Korea does.
As part of the world, we cannot avoid being exposed to the values
and lifestyles of others. We should not be afraid of them and shy
away from them; we should embrace the chance to get to know
cultures different from our own. Allowing Singaporeans to use
satellite dishes could give us access to new information.
As for subscribing to pornographic channels, we could make
arrangements with the providers of such channels not to allow
Singaporeans access to them.
If we truly want to be part of the global community, we cannot
afford even the slightest trace of xenophobia. We are a democratic
society that espouses freedom of choice.
Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that
all human beings ". . . are endowed with reason and conscience . .
." Article 19 states that everyone has the right to hold opinions
without restriction and to ". . . seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless of
frontiers". It is time for Singaporeans to exercise the
intelligence, the judgment and the conscience that all humans
possess.
The Government should not try to protect us against foreign
influences, for that will inhibit our growth as a people.
Protecting us against pornography is reasonable, but it is not a
just reason to ban satellite dishes.
Besides, exposing us to the rest of the world will give us a
chance to exercise our judgment and to choose for ourselves what
is right and what is wrong. And if we choose to live the Western
way, that is our choice. No one should dictate the way in which we
are to live. If our choice leads us to tragedy, then so be it. We
must be free to choose our own destiny.
NG WEIWEN
======================================
New Cutting:
[Newsbytes - The Pulse of the Information Age.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Astro To Subsidize Cost Of Satellite Receivers In Malaysia 10/10/96
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
HONG KONG, 1996 OCT 10 (NB) -- By I.T. Daily. All-Asian Satellite Television
and Radio Co. (Astro) will subsidize about RM13 million for the 65,000
digital satellite receivers Malaysians will own by the end of this year, the
Malaysian Star reports. It will pay RM200 toward the cost of each DSR or
decoder to make satellite television affordable to Malaysians.
Astro is operated by Measat Broadcast Network Sdn Bhd from its Asian
Broadcast Centre at Sungei Besi.
The decoder, now manufactured in Brussels by Philips, will be produced
locally by the end of next year.
Philips had undertaken to transfer technology of manufacturing the decoders
in Malaysia in its agreement with Astro, said Measat chief operating
officer, Paul Edwards.
Through the decoder, priced at RM1,350 each, the Astro package will transmit
23 channels in the beginning and more later. This works out to as little as
RM2.67 a day for 23 entertainment and information channels, Edwards said.
The DSR receives television, radio and data signals from the satellite dish.
The receiver is connected to the subscriber's TV set and may also be linked
to a hi-fi stereo.
Asked why Astro had only allowed Philips to manufacture the receivers,
Edwards said Philips had invested millions in research and in developing and
designing the state-of-the-art digital receivers for Astro.
====================================
14 March 1998
The Forum Editor
The Straits Times
390 Kim Seng Road
Singapore 239495
Dear Editor
MITA'S MORAL OBLIGATION
Is it not ironic that personal satellite television receivers remain banned even as
Government-linked Company SingTel is poised to enter the satellite television broadcast
business? SingTel's ST-1 satellite will have 16 Ku-band transponders for television
transmissions.
The Ministry of Information and the Arts said that satellite dishes are proscribed to
keep out 'negative influences'. SingTel, as a GLC, should therefore not risk becoming a
unwitting conduit for 'negative influences' to invade other countries in the region. For
SingTel is unlikely to be able to filter ST-1's programming if it wants customers. Even if it
could do so, programming that is innocuous by SingTel's standards may be pernicious by
the standards of countries within ST-1's broadcasting reach.
Admittedly, MITA may not have the legal obligation or power to prevent SingTel
from legally embarking on its new venture. However, the recent fuss over the premature
termination of scholarship contracts has made us all thoroughly aware that it is not enough
in Singapore simply to adhere to the letter of the law. If MITA continues to ban satellite
receivers, does it not have the moral obligation to criticise SingTel publicly for planning
satellite television broadcasts? In doing so, MITA would not, of course, be shaming
SingTel. It would merely be emphasising the point that SingTel could end up inadvertently
dishing out negative influences to other countries.
If, on the other hand, MITA thinks it is all right for people in other countries to
receive ST-1's broadcasts, it should explain how that position is consistent with its ban on
satellite dishes.
Yours sincerely
Chong Fu Shin Francis
======================================
MAR 21 1998
SingTel is service provider and not a broadcaster
I REFER to the letter "Ironic to help transmit shows to others" by
Francis Chong Fu Shin (ST, March 17).
Singapore Telecom is a telecommunications service provider. We
provide the facilities and infrastructure to connect users for
voice, data and video services.
SingTel is not in, and there are no plans to go into, the
broadcast business such as broadcasting TV programmes to viewers.
For more than a decade, SingTel has provided satellite
communication services for TV-programme transmission, well before
our investment in ST-1.
Video programmes of our customers are transmitted via satellite,
and these video signals are received by the local TV stations in
various countries, which will then broadcast them over the air or
cable to home-viewers.
Alternatively, viewers may also receive programmes directly,
depending on the regulations of their respective countries. These
can be TV programmes, movies or even material for long-distance
learning, depending on the type of content put in by our
customers.
When ST-1 is launched, it will be a high-powered satellite with
the capability to transmit voice, data and video signals.
The usage of the transponders will be determined by our customers.
If customers intend to lease these transponders from SingTel for
direct-to-home broadcasting, they will have to seek the necessary
approval from the authorities in their respective countries.
Satellites such as ST-1 are also a practical medium for the fast
exchange of data between computers at home or in the office.
In the long run, users may well obtain information on the Internet
via satellite.
Businesses are increasingly using video-transmission capabilities
of satellites to broadcast meetings, training sessions and special
events from a central location to many remote locations.
This form of satellite communication is particularly useful in
areas where the telecommunications infrastructure is not
sufficient to cover remote areas.
In several South-east Asian countries, satellites are used to
supplement existing telecommunications networks.
Our investment in ST-1 is part of our effort to have a
comprehensive and state-of-the-art telecommunications
infrastructure that will support Singapore as a major
communications hub in this region.
With ST-1, SingTel will have the advantage of being a satellite
operator as well, and we will be able to provide one-stop service
to broadcasters and at the same time, meet the needs of
multinational corporations for voice, data or video transmission.
FOO KIM LENG (Ms)
Corporate Communications Manager
Singapore Telecom
===================================
MAR 21 1998
Censorship not same everywhere
IN HIS letter, "Ironic to help transmit shows to others" (ST,
March 17), Mr Francis Chong argued that it is inconsistent for
SingTel's ST-1 satellite to relay television transmissions when
the Government bans personal satellite receivers here.
Mr Chong assumes that we consider our censorship standards to be
of universal application. But we do not. We respect the right of
each country to set its own censorship standards, which may be
tighter or looser than ours. Of course, if there is international
agreement on minimum standards of satellite broadcasts, we too
will abide by them.
CHEN HWAI LIANG
Assistant Director/ Public Affairs
for Permanent Secretary Ministry of Information & the Arts