Baey Yam Keng: 'I just ignore the trolls'

Tampines GRC MP Baey Yam Keng is among the PAP politicians who is very active on social media, and has a large fan following online. He tells Singapolitics in this Supper Club interview that it’s not just his selfies, but an open and persistently engaged attitude that has helped him in cyberspace. Unfortunately, with its slew of new online media regulations, he senses that the Government disagrees.

Q: Some believe that the Government is trying to clamp down on free speech online, with the licensing regime for news websites and now the requirement to register before posting on the Reach feedback forum. You've actually advocated for a light touch in regulating the online space. What's your take on what's been happening?

I think in terms of cyber-bullying and hacking, the penalties will increase and I think most people are supportive of that. What I think is more tricky is the signals that the Government is giving. The news website licensing, that is essentially about taking down things that violate certain rules within a certain time frame. As a principle, that makes sense. And the registration on the Reach website, that's just about using your Facebook account to comment. It's not about asking for IC numbers and all that. It's no big deal.

Q: But if it's no big deal then why do it at all?

Yes, the problem is that there is a signal that you are regulating, making it more difficult for people to express their views. And this is where the Government needs to look at what is the real substance - in terms of control and better order - that you are achieving, versus the negative repercussions among the netizens of such moves. This is where we have to weigh it more sensitively. From the Government's perspective, I think it's not about clamping down on dissenting views. It hopes that the impact is in getting people to be more accountable for their views and so be more responsible.

If everything you say online reflects your real views, that's fine. It can be extreme and critical but it's fine. But trolling is (different in) creating an illusion that the whole world thinks in a certain way, and blowing up sentiments that is not actually widely-held views. I think that is unhealthy.

What the Government is probably trying to achieve is just to rein it in a little so it becomes a friendlier space for people to feel comfortable. So those who want to say good things about the Government will feel comfortable enough to say so.

We want the online space to reflect more accurately what the public is thinking. Now there is no balance, it is too tilted towards one side.

Q: Some would argue that the mainstream media is too tilted towards the pro-government side, so the online space is just balancing that out.

I agree. The nature of social media allows people to be more daring and upfront. No matter the rules in place, it will always be so, and will always be more liberal and open compared to print and broadcast media. I welcome that.

I don't think the online space will ever be calm. That is the nature of the medium and really it would be a pity if we only hear one side. If it reaches that stage it's quite sad, because it's such a good opportunity for us to capture what's happening in coffeeshops, among taxi drivers. It's all online and I can have a sense.

Of course, how I analyse it is one thing, but at least I have access to it. It helps us in that way and I welcome that.

Q: Will the requirement to register to use the Reach website just cause traffic to plummet? That is, is it futile to try to regulate cyberspace?

My own view is to ignore the trolls. I have my own objectives. Through my social media efforts, I want people to know what I think, what I do. If you don't buy it, that's fine. I believe most people are rational. I must have that confidence that people can discern, and have their eyes and ears to see, to assess, to make their own judgement. That is what I believe in.

The Government probably doesn't take that view now. They think we can still protect people, what they read, what they access. It's just different starting points.

Q: Has the Government's view and actions regarding the online space grown more conservative recently?

Of course, the last few years, social media has gotten more prevalent and you're beginning to see the impact. To their credit, they uncover a lot of things, do some whistle-blowing. But the Government really goes around responding and fighting fires all the time. People are quite stretched now. If this continues, with limited resources, the Government will be lost. So the thinking probably is, let's try to moderate it, have some order.

We have to wait and see if there will be any impact. But for me, I am just an individual, an MP, it's probably easier for me to deal with it. Government is a machinery, a system, not just one person. It must be a framework that people can work within. You cannot expect everyone in the civil service to be savvy with social media.

Q: Is there another approach it can take besides more regulations and attempts to moderate?

I think we need to amplify the voice of the Government in the Internet space. Right now it's still quite small, and people are transitioning from dealing with mainstream media to social media.

I think it is about the style, the way outreach and engagement is done. Ultimately, social media is just a neutral platform. How you use it is up to you.

I personally find it very useful for me to connect to people, have some influence over what people know and think, and advocate for certain causes. The Government can also do that, although of course it's on a much bigger scale.

I'm quietly confident that we can get there one day, but we cannot lose hope. We have to embrace it because it will not go away. We just have to find a way to do that and I feel that if the Government is more present in social media, the voice and the messaging is there, in a way that is easily accepted and digested by the community, that to me is the more pro-active and sustainable way. Because you cannot rein in things, you just have to increase your outreach.

Q: So the Government's attitude towards cyberspace is different from yours?

That's no secret. Probably, now there is a divergence. But I must also say that I am more progressive and liberal so I don't see myself as the benchmark.

Sometimes some of the ministers give the impression that they think of the online space as some horrible Wild West. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, for example, recently said that those people who go online are more of the discontented ones, and that satisfied people wouldn't bother.

To be fair to PM, I don't think he reads all the comments as he has thousands. I don't know how he is being briefed or whatever but probably his staff highlights to him the things that need his attention and those might be more of the negative comments. That could be a reason that he thinks this. I'm speculating.

But for me, I don't think so. Of course it's a mix and you must have a certain sense of humour to accept certain nasty things online. But if you make the effort to build that kind of community, people become familiar with what you stand for, what you are consistently doing, I think that community can help as well.

PM Lee also said he is flameproof and he's right that you just must be thick-skinned. When my whole selfies thing came out, there was criticism too. Some like it, some don't, but over time I think people will see that it's not just about selfies. That makes headlines but there's a lot more dimensions to what I do than taking pictures of myself. Even my selfies, there's a message too.

I know that in the population, there will be segments who cannot accept it and think that I'm trivialising the role of the MP. So I must just have that gumption. In the long run, it's good for me so just persevere and I do feel that I'm on the right path.

Q: Turning to the topic of the Primary School Leaving Examinations (PSLE), your wife actually wrote a play about how your oldest daughter's classmates all could not make it to her birthday party because they had tuition and enrichment classes.

That happened last year, and her birthday was in April! I don't think that should be the way things are. In fact, this year, we were quite heartened to see a change. For my youngest daughter whose birthday is in October, quite a few turned up! But she is in Primary 3.

Q: Your kids also don't have tuition. How do you resist joining the "arms race"?

I did consider it for my eldest daughter. At one point, she was in Primary 5, and I was falling into the trap of concerned parents and the T-score. We know that you can score in mathematics to bring your overall score up. Her maths is OK, above average but not full marks. And maths is my responsibility, my wife is in charge of languages. But I don't have much time at home, so I thought, I would outsource it. But my wife was very against it.

My daughter is doing well, above average, she said. Not top of the class, but good enough. My wife also checked with the teachers and they don't recommend it. They said tutors actually interfere with their pace of teaching.

So I gave into my wife and I think on hindsight we are happy we made that decision. I think without tuition, my children are more independent and take it upon themselves that it's their role to understand what they learn in school. If they don't understand, they must try harder, ask the teacher. They have ownership. I know some kids, because of tuition, they become very dependent on tutor and don't pay attention in class. That defeats the purpose.

There are friends who tell me, oh but your kids are doing well, they're naturally intelligent so it's fine that they don't have tuition. But actually, my thinking has progressed on this.

Among my three kids, the youngest one is weaker in academics compared to her brother and sister. But I tell myself, OK she has other strengths. For example, among the three of them, she is the only one who made class monitor. So she has leadership abilities, and her teacher wrote that in her report book too.

I think as parents we need to look for the strengths. Every child is different. Not all will do well in their studies, and if you force them, it will make it a stressful experience and it will be worse if they lose interest in learning.

Q: At the start of this year, you left your job as managing director of PR firm Hill&Knowlton. Was that a difficult decision considering you are the sole breadwinner and your kids are young?

I enjoy what I'm doing as an MP, and I wanted to have more time and energy to do it. I find that there's a lot I can get done easily in person, whether to get government agencies to do things or getting buy-in from residents.

We are a very simple family, no luxurious indulgences or whatever. We get by. Compared to most families, we are already above average, so we can't ask for more. We don't go for fancy holidays or big cars. My wife is also very low maintenance, she doesn't spend on bags or shoes.

Of course, one day, I will leave politics. It depends on when that day is, if my kids are still dependent on me - there's some uncertainty there. But I must be sure of myself that I can find a livelihood somehow. So far, we have not needed to make major adjustments.

Ultimately it's also being kind to myself. Juggling all that was quite taxing. I think I managed quite OK, but I know I wasn't putting my fullest into both. That doesn't given me a sense of achievement at all. So this year I've been happier, more carefree. More time for myself, to keep fit, exercise. These are things you can't buy.

I can also be more active on social media. In the past, I wouldn't post anything during office hours because I felt guilty. But now it's up to me.

And now my wife and I have weekly day, Friday, the whole day we keep it free to spend together.

You really need time in your life to do nothing also. And I feel that I'm making my own impact in my own ways, which I think is more meaningful than worrying about the bottom line for my company. I feel much happier now.

rchang@sph.com.sg

Go to Singapolitics for more stories.