As you all know, a few Hwa Chong students have found their way onto STOMP, albeit not because of their good deeds, but rather, because they were photographed holding ice-creams on the public bus. Somehow, if you have not caught wind of this incident, this is the link to the page: http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/stomp/sgseen/ugly_commuters/606506/even_students_from_elite_school_cant_follow_noeating_rule_on_bus.html Now, I would go on to voice my two cents on this matter.
Firstly, as a Hwa Chong student, I was initially taken aback and a little angry at this certain individual who seems to want to tarnish the school’s reputation and mock us for being ‘elite’. As seen from the multitude of comments, mostly flame wars between ‘patriotic’ HCI students and members of the public, there have been many people trying to defend HCI. However, what really irks me is the way that they are defending HCI. Seriously, calling the photos photoshopped? Insulting other stompers and mocking them by calling them retards? I shall not reveal their STOMP usernames, or their true identities, for that matter, but I am utterly appalled at their response. Are these what HCI students are bred up to be? Are these the so-called ‘moral values’ that HCI intends to inculcate in students? Granted, these are only a few black sheep, and they might have been caught in their moment of anger which resulted in them posting such ridiculous remarks, but the fact remains that people remember you for your bad deeds, not your good ones. Likewise, by seeing how HCI students attempt to defend their school by fighting fire with fire, it is inevitable for members of the public to think badly of HCI students. Despite warnings from teachers in HCI, these students continued their verbal assault, and were unrelenting in the discussions. It is indeed especially horrible to see HCI students not thinking with their heads, and turning to violence (albeit not physical) to solve the issue.
The next thing I am going to blog about is the whole idea of moral courage. What exactly is STOMP for? Is it a medium for the public to shame others online by revealing all their wrongdoings online for everyone to see? By doing this, is this really helping the person in the wrong to change? By simply hiding behind your camera, do you really think that this would make the person really want to change? I respond to these questions with a straight no. How useful is STOMP in making someone change for the better? For example, if you see a group of people being rowdy at midnight, do you go up and stop the people straight on, or do you simply hide behind the camera, assume anonymity, and take pictures of the people in the wrong? Why can’t Singaporeans simply walk up to the person/people in the wrong, and tell them straight that they are wrong and need to change? What I feel about most Singaporeans is that they are too prideful, and have the mentality that ‘if it does not affect me, I do not bother about it.’ This selfish mindset, coupled with the ‘kaypoh’ nature of Singaporeans, lead many Singaporeans to resort to these public sites to publicly shame
others.
The final topic I am going to talk about is the veil of anonymity that one gets when online. I feel that the anonymity online is the root of the problem of STOMP. As I pointed out in the above paragraph, Singaporeans would rather not go up to the person and chide him, revealing his own identity in the process and possibly causing a grudge, but instead would rather utilise the anonymity online, by posting (sometimes) derogatory remarks and posts, in the knowledge that there would not be any implications whatsoever. This anonymity instantly removes any credibility, and thus giving netizens courage to flame others openly online, all because they know that nothing will happen to them in real life. As seen from the second and third paragraphs, the main reason that people dare do stuff that they would not in real life is all because of this anonymity they gain online. Is the Internet really a platform just for mean-spirited people to exploit the anonymity for their own personal gain? There is a old story from one of Plato’s books, about how Gyges, a once honest shepherd turned to evil deeds and usurped the throne, all because he discovered a ring that could make him invisible. All because of this invisibility, Gyges is then willing to do things that he would never dare to in real life. This story further emphasises on the sad fact that anonymity online nowadays is easily exploited and used for underhand purposes.
In conclusion, what I want to say about this whole STOMP hoo-hah is that the fact remains that people still misuse the Internet, and instead abuse their cloak of invisibility for their own personal wants. Is it really because of STOMP that Singaporeans had lost their moral courage and will only dare to go online to criticise others? Though supposedly not a plausible side-effect of STOMP when it was first introduced, I feel that the unfortunate fact remains that STOMP has caused many Singaporeans to lost much moral courage and credibility.
Cheers,
Roystan
No comments:
Post a Comment