| Summary: | This paper aims to examine the narratives, and grounds of justifications, given by state actors on the need for legislation targeting fake news or online falsehoods. Thematic coding was used to identify and categorise arguments made during the second reading of the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation (POFMA) Bill into themes of justifications. Following which, this paper then juxtaposed the themes identified against initial cases prosecuted to examine if the justifications given during the introduction of POFMA are congruent with the basis for prosecution after its passing. It was found that the arguments made in support of POFMA clustered around five themes. This includes maintaining racial and religious harmony, the need for speed, the ineffectiveness of online platforms in self-regulating falsehoods, the prevention of foreign interference and influence in domestic politics, as well as to safeguard public institutions. It was also observed that among these themes of justifications, the need to safeguard public institutions appears to be the primary reason for the use of POFMA by the government. Despite the heavy rhetoric on potential threats brought about by falsehoods on race and religion, and by foreign actors, no such cases have occurred. It remains to be seen if the government will invoke POFMA on these grounds in the future.
|
|---|