Bukit Batok 4N SS Prelim ANS 2019

Bukit Batok Secondary School Preliminary Examination 2019 Sec 4 Normal Academic Social Studies Marking scheme Question 1 Question target: Inference 1a Study Source A. What can you learn from this source about the impact of POFMA on Singaporeans? EYA [ 5 ] Note: Inference(s) should be on the impact of POFMA on Singaporeans. Do not accept negative impact as an inference, unless the nature of the negative impact is explained. L1 Describes source / no inference [ 1 ] L2 Inference(s), unsupported 1 inference – 2m / 2 inferences – 3m e.g. POFMA could cause Singaporeans to become more fearful of what they do online e.g. POFMA could lead to the significant loss of privacy and freedom for Singaporeans [ 2 - 3 ] L3 Inference, supported e.g. I can learn from this source that POFMA could cause Singaporeans to become more fearful of what they do online. This is evident as the source says that POFMA “could be used to require any Internet company to keep records of what users view”, and that this information could be used one day by the government to identify “threats or potential threats based on what they wrote and viewed”. Thus, with POFMA, Singaporeans might become more worried about the implications of what they do online and fearful that their actions could be used by the government against them. OR e.g. I can learn from this source that POFMA could lead to the significant loss of privacy and freedom for Singaporeans. This is evident as the source says that POFMA “could be used to require any Internet company to keep records of what users view” and that this extends even to encrypted messaging services. This is “a chilling new level of surveillance online”, showing how POFMA threatens Singaporeans’ privacy. [ 4 - 5 ]

Question target: Purpose 1b Study Source B. Why was this post made on The Alternative View? EYA [6] L1 Describes the source/failed reason [1] L2 Misinterpretation e.g. This post was made on the Alternative View to convince Singaporeans that the POFMA bill should be implemented as the Law Minister says that the Bill should not affect Free Speech. [2] L3 Reason based on sub-message / context / outcome Based on sub-message e.g. This post was made to convince Singaporeans that POFMA should not be implemented / that the implementation of POFMA could negatively affect the freedom of speech in Singapore. Based on context e.g This post was made because there are some Singaporeans who are unhappy about the introduction of the POFMA Bill. They view the Bill as giving the government too much power and are concerned that the government could abuse it to restrict free speech. Based on outcome Audience must be explicitly stated/implied e.g. This post was made so that Singaporeans would feel upset and put pressure on the government to improve the Bill to protect freedom of speech / so that Singaporeans would feel upset and put pressure on the government not to implement the Bill. [3] L4 Reason based on message Based on message e.g. This post was made to convince Singaporeans that POFMA could lead to restrictions on the freedom of speech/could negatively affect freedom of speech. This is evident as the source draws attention to the words “should not” in the CNA headline, “Free speech should not be affected by this Bill,” says K. Shanmugam SC. This is to highlight to Singaporeans that the government is not willing to guarantee that the POFMA bill will not lead to limitations on free speech [4] L5 Reason based on message and outcome This post was published to criticise the POFMA bill as it could lead to restrictions on the freedom of speech/negatively affect freedom of speech, so that Singaporeans would put pressure on the government to include greater safeguards for free speech in the bill / put pressure on the government not to implement the bill. This is evident as the source draws [5- 6]

attention to the word “should not” in the CNA headline, “Free speech should not be affected by this Bill,” says K. Shanmugam SC. This is to highlight to Singaporeans that the government is not willing to guarantee that the POFMA bill will limit free speech. Question target: Comparison 1 c Study Source C and D. How different are these two sources? EYA 7m L1 Difference AND/OR Similarity based on provenance / source type / invalid comparison e.g. Sources C and D are different. Source C is an opinion piece while Source D is a speech. 1 L2 False matching e.g. Sources C and D are different. Source C says that fake news can threaten Singapore’s racial harmony but Source D does not mention this. 2 L3 Difference OR Similarity in content Award 3m for 1 similarity/difference unsupported. Award 4m for 1 similarity/difference supported. e.g. Sources C and D are similar as they both show that there are concerns that POFMA can be abused by the government to silence its critics. Source C states how some Singaporeans “worry that POFMA will be used by future ministers to silence opposing voices”. Likewise, Source D states that POFMA will allow a future Government to “selectively punish a few critics as an example to others, achieving a chilling effect” where people would no longer dare to criticise the government for fear of being punished. e.g. Sources C and D are different in terms of their views about whether POFMA should be implemented. Source C believes that POFMA should be implemented. This is evident as Source D states that it “supports legislation that empowers the Government to take swift action against viral fake news that can harm a multiracial Singapore”. Thus, by helping to control the spread of fake news, POFMA can help to maintain Singapore’s racial harmony by reducing misunderstanding and suspicion. However, Source D believes that POFMA should not be implemented as it can be abused by a future government to silence its critics. This is evident as Source C states that POFMA will allow a future Government to “selectively punish a few critics as an example to others, achieving a chilling effect”. e.g. Sources C and D are different in their views about whether it is easy for citizens to challenge a decision made by a Minister under POFMA in court. Source C argues that it is easy for citizens to challenge the government’s decisions in court, stating that “I’m sure we won’t hesitate to challenge unfair ministerial orders in court, especially since one only needs to fill up a standard form to do so”. This shows that the process of challenging a Ministerial decision is relatively straightforward. However, Source D disagrees and believes that it is quite difficult for citizens to do so. This is evident as Source D states how “although the people are allowed to appeal to the court against the Minister’s actions, it is both time consuming and energy sapping”. 3-4

L4 Difference AND Similarity in content Award 4m for 1 difference AND 1 similarity unsupported. Award 5m for 1 difference AND 1 similarity supported. 4-5 L5 Difference in purpose, supported. E.g. Sources C and D are different in purpose. The purpose of Source C is to convince Singaporeans that POFMA will help to preserve Singapore’s harmony and that their concerns about the potential for POFMA to be abused are overblown, so that Singaporeans will feel more reassured and be more supportive of the Bill. However, the purpose of Source D is to convince Singaporeans that POFMA will give the Government too much power that can be abused, so that Singaporeans can put more pressure on the Government to modify the Bill to address these concerns. 6-7 1d Study Source E. Does this source prove that the implementation of POFMA will benefit Singapore? EYA. [7] L1 Answers based on provenance Source E does not prove that the implementation of POFMA will benefit Singapore. It is a sp