7th Annual PR Academy Conference

I am not surprised that quite a few of you here remember Davinder Singh, Eleanor Wong and Indranee Rajah. But have you wondered why you recall these debaters so well?

In fact today's debaters on The Arena on Channel 5 are just as good, if not better than we were in the 70s and 80s, But I wonder how many will recall either ''The Arena'', or the brilliant debaters who featured here today 20 years from now.

Now let me show you someone who has garnered even larger viewership than any of us here today. You might have seen this YouTube video of a 3-year old Korean boy in his diapers, belting out The Beatles? hit, ''Hey Jude'' with great gusto. This video is the latest viral phenomenon - emailed from one friend to another. The main clip of this on You Tube alone has garnered over 5 million hits and over 2,000 comments

Content, Distribution, Viewership - What Has Changed?

As recently as just 8 or 9 years ago - the pre-Web 2.0 days - viewers had very little choice in terms of content and distribution. Content was expensive to produce. Big production studios had hegemony over content, and glamorous productions cost millions of dollars. It was the same where news and newspapers were concerned.

Distribution channels were also limited. In fact in Singapore, in the 70s and 80s, before the arrival of cable, Internet, etc, we had only one TV station in the form of SBC with only 2 or 3 channels. That left viewers with little choice. Communicators and advertisers did not need to fret too much about where their target audience would be.

But everything changed with the advent of new media, While the tables have not been entirely turned - blockbusters from Hollywood, Bollywood, and Hong Kong still command audiences - user-generated content has become an increasing occurrence. You Tube is perhaps the best example.

How much did it cost to produce the clip of the 3 year old Korean boy in diapers? A handheld camera easily bought from any electronic supplies store. And distribution costs? All that was needed was access to the Internet and a YouTube account - both of which can be obtained free. The barriers-of-entry for both content production and distribution have come down. The game has changed. And the communications industry is sitting up because audience fragmentation - from ''catch-all'' broadcasting to ''catch-me-if-you-can'' narrowcasting - changes some rules of the game.

Old Media Vs. New Media?

But in the humdrum and excitement of the Internet era, let's not be seduced into this false dichotomy of ''old vs. new media,'' or ''old vs. young.'' It is worthwhile to recast the discussion in the larger historical context.

The invention of the rotary printing press in the 19th century revolutionised the print media. Millions of copies of a page could be mass produced in a single day. Books, magazines and newspapers became widely available - and the mass media was born. Then Guglielmo Marconi developed the radiotelegraph, also in the 19th century. This was the genesis of radio. The radio gave rise to the ''sound bite''. The origins of television can be traced back to the discovery of the photoconductivity of the element selenium, which like the rotary printing press and Marconi's radiotelegraph, happened during the Industrial Revolution. Television gave rise to the ''door stop interview''. The 18th and 19th centuries seem far behind us. But books continue to sell by the millions - just ask Amazon.com. Billions still watch TV. That's why Oprah Winfrey is the richest entertainer in history. We continue to tune into radio; and television is not about to die. Each new technology created new modalities and widened the reach and impact of media. The older forms never really died. So, will the Internet kill newspapers, books, destroy radio, and obliterate TV? I don't think so.

So, let's put things in perspective. We should not fall into a ''technocentric fallacy'' - what MIT academic Seymour Papert, a pioneer in artificial intelligence, describes as believing everything can be resolved or changed by technology. The problem with this view is that it ignores the fact that we are dealing with human beings and human needs. But in rebutting such a fallacy, we must be equally careful not to fall into yet another, which Papert calls the ''just-a-tool fallacy.'' By this, he means the failure to distinguish between tools, that merely improve one's ability to do a pre-existing job, and another kind of tool that enables the creation of new tasks nobody thought to do, or skill nobody could have had before.

New Tools Offer New Ways to Communicate & Mobilise

In fact, new media does open up new vistas and new opportunities for organizations-whether they be government, NGOs, or corporations-to communicate with their stakeholders. At the same time, there are several new attributes that need to be considered for communication in the new media landscape. What are some of these attributes?

First, presentations have to be short. Second, use images and music to engage at an emotional and visceral level. Third, content has to be customized to suit the tastes of specific subgroups and stakeholders. Fourth, the most effective way to disseminate a message is to do so virally, through peers. We all have received such messages from our friends - ranging from the comic to more serious issues. Just ponder for a few seconds how you reacted to these missives from your trusted friends. In fact, in the 2008 Trust Barometer - an annual survey conducted by global PR firm Edelman - the company reported that it was seeing, and I quote, ''high numbers for the credibility of word of mouth, not just as a means to convey information, but a potent way to share perceptions and emotions about that information.''

Fifth, everything published on the web is permanent, as anyone who has tried to remove a embarrassing blog, picture or video would have discovered the hard way. Sixth, the defining attribute of the new media is interactivity. This is where the real power of the Web 2.0 resides. It enables participatory dialogue, co-creation of new ideas and almost instant mobilization of multiple lobbies.

The question then is how governments should respond to this new landscape. This can be answered at several levels. At its most basic, it should mean more efficient government-public interfaces, whether it be filing income tax or applying for licences. At a more fundamental level, it must mean greater transparency. It will not be possible for governments to lie in the future. Governments will lose their monopoly on information just as they do not have a monopoly on wisdom. The role of governments will have to change. To paraphrase Chris Anderson in his book The Long Tail: ''Make everything available. Help me find it''. In short, we need to give people as much information as possible on a subject, and give them room to discuss and arrive at solutions. With adequate information and space, we hope that rational and constructive views will prevail. Governments will still have to set agendas and exercise leadership, but they will have to do so consensually and collectively, except where national security is at stake.

The Public Service's Engagement in New Media

And just as public relations professionals in corporations are exploring the potential of new media, the Singapore Government is also actively experimenting with new media in public communications.

Take REACH for example. The public feedback agency uses a wide variety of platforms including face-to-face dialogue sessions, online discussion fora, e-Townhalls, SMS polling, and e-consultation papers to seek the views of Singaporeans on various issues such as the Budget, public transport, community issues, to name a few.

Health Promotion Board has been experimenting with using YouTube videos to promote public health, and recently the Singapore Police Force set up its own channel on YouTube where you can already find a series of community outreach videos.

The upcoming Youth Olympic Games in 2010 will also see new media used extensively. It is already on Facebook and Friendster. We also intend to create a virtual reality space, similar to 3-D virtual online world Second Life. This will enable young people from around the world to anticipate and experience Singapore and the various venues even before the YOG begins. There will also be a digital concierge service to enable the YOG community to access personalized information and services anywhere, anytime. They will be able to do this via existing mobile phone networks, or via our widely available Wireless@SG infrastructure. You have probably also have heard and read about the exciting virtual city project, ''Co-space'' that the Media Development Authority is spear-heading. This will also provide opportunities for people in Singapore and around the world to interact in real time at the various Singapore sites.

As we roll out our next generation high bandwidth open access network infrastructure, you can expect to see a proliferation of new and exciting ways for both corporations and governments to engage the public. I can assure you that we will not be paralysed by fear of the unknown or worries about loss of control. The opportunities outweigh the risks.

Staying Grounded in Reality

It is important for all of us to be grounded in reality. Because, reality is where everything begins and ends. The internet can echo and amplify issues. The internet can connect us faster and mobilize us more effectively. However, political and social issues do not have a cyber-life of their own. Take for instance the big buzz that NKF saga created online. Where did it begin? In the real world, with problems in the management. And where did it end? In the physical world - with the verdict in a court of law. We have noticed a ''3 day rule''. If an issue does not resonate with the real ground, postings on the internet will wane after 3 days.

Government's Fundamental Considerations

So before I end, allow me to share with you what are some of the Singapore Government's key considerations when it comes to the media space, be it ''traditional'' or ''new''.

First of all, we see this as source of tremendous opportunity, both in the economic and social sphere. That is why we are investing so heavily in this field.

Second, it is our duty to maintain the integrity and security of the State. Hence our stance against for any threats that may compromise security or public order. harmonious race and religious relations is well-known and is fundamental.

Thrid, we want to nurture a cohesive populace with sufficient ballast of shared values, hopes, and dreams. In particular, we remain hypersensitive to any threats against our racial and religious harmony.

Fourth, we want to encourage Singaporeans to take co-ownership, and participate in both the challenges and the solutions for our future as a nation.

Above all else, the most vital and precious consideration for us is honesty credibility and trust. This is a key competitive advantage of Singapore. Singaporeans trust their Government to be honest and to do right by them. And Singaporeans are trusted wherever they go. The Singapore passport, if I may say, is a ''Gold Standard''. Honesty, Credibility, Trust - these are the defining hallmarks of Singapore.

So, if I may sum up my credo for communicating in a new media environment. It is: Never lie, always be credible and listen to honestly held views of responsible people especially when they are different from yours.

Thank you.

Privacy Statement \| Terms Of Use \| Rate This Site	Copyright 2006 REACH
	Best viewed using IE 6.0+