According to a report from The New Paper, a screengrab of a PSI figure that was supposedly replaced by the National Environment Agency and an online article alleging that the severe acute respiratory syndrome (Sars) virus is back made the rounds on the Internet.
They were false.
Did you know the spreading of both articles could be considered scaremongering and could run afoul of the law?
Criminal lawyer Chen Chee Yen said scaremongers could be liable under Section 45 of the Telecommunications Act.
Those who do not create the false information but pass it on can be liable too if "he or she knew the information was false", he said.
However, not everyone agrees with the New Paper reporter;
A reader Lukas said:
How on earth is the PSI reading and the SARS epidemic corelated?
Why must anyone take this seriously? Most importantly, how is that considered "scaremongering" when the screengrab allegedly meant to inform members of the public how the NEA quickly replaced a higher reading in just minutes as soon as the public expressed dismayal at the sluggish response from government officials to get the "contigency plan" moving?
Do tell?
Another reader Eric said:
"Do the papers under SPH fall under this Act too? It seems like they are very good at tarnishing opposition reputation and scaring Singaporeans too."
What do you think TRS readers?