Where elsewhere in the world expatriates have contributed largely to overseas democracy movements for changes in their homeland, in the case of Singapore, the role of Singaporean expatriates in mobilising the people towards greater democracy seems to be muted.

Ideally, the internet offers an effective avenue for political expression and for disseminating information that cannot be carried by the traditional media that are bound by government laws and regulations.

Thus it can be expected that expatriate websites will take the lead in uncensored political expression. After all, internet technology offers the ideal tools and techniques to do so.

Typically, the first online expressions of a political nature concerning Singapore indeed started with attempts towards democratisation from abroad.

A few of the websites that have their origins abroad are Singapore Window , Singaporeans for Democracy and Tang Talk .

However, despite taking a lead in voicing demands for greater freedom, they have not created a notable difference owing to some of the political and social factors prevailing in the city-state.

A principal reason is the strong fear of persecution that pervades Singaporeans, even expatriates. Hence, the potential of the internet to convey political communication is not employed to the optimum.

Websites' content themselves, remaining no more than an electronic version of a publication brought out in Singapore, are fully conscious and compliant with government-imposed constraints.

Government attention

To take the example of Singapore Window, one of the first websites to be floated by expatriates pertaining to Singapore in 1997, with the purposes of rectifying the media bias in the city-state.

An analysis reveals that the website does not employ many of the features of the internet and in essence remains, at best, an archive of all that has been published in the local and foreign media about Singapore.

This is perhaps owing to the fact that the website does not want to invite particular government attention and would like to express its criticism of the government policies in a subtle manner, through selective gate-keeping of articles.

Rather than risk censure by the government or worse, a total blocking of the website, Singapore Window ensures its accessibility in Singapore by walking a tight rope.

The website's reticence could also be a reflection of the trend of self-censorship that pervades Singaporean society, including the media. As with the traditional media in the city-state, the website seems to be well aware of what it is expected to convey.

Singapore Window's muted criticism of the government is also indicative of the fact that it shares the ideology of the ruling People's Action Party (PAP) to a certain extent.

The website does not hesitate to pay the devil its due and does contain complementary references to the PAP and its leaders. It is only certain aspects of the governance that it seems to question.

Thus, instead of exploiting the technological features of the internet, the website is content to regurgitate information on Singapore that has been published in the region. In the process it seldom employs the features that we have come to identify with online publications.

For instance, off-site links are confined to the homepage where links are provided to Asia Observer, Asian Women, Singaporeans for Democracy, New Sintercom, Think Centre and malaysiakini.com.

The rest of the website incorporates only on-site links leading to solipsism. Instead of getting a range of perspectives on a given issue, readers are taken to material within the website. This however, only succeeds in reinforcing the viewpoint of the website.

No feedback

The much-touted technological feature of 'feedback' is not employed. Much like a newspaper, Singapore Window offers an address that people can write to. The editor goes by the Latin pseudonym of Justus Semper that translates to 'justice forever' and although letters are invited from the readers, unlike in a newspaper, they are not published.

Singapore Window hardly functions as the virtual public sphere that sociologists are fond of evoking. Although it provides - in principle - equality of access, there is no diversity of opinion.

The website focuses on just one view and seldom incorporates opposing perspectives. Reciprocity is non-existent and there is no contribution by the reader to the debate.

Importantly, the reader has no control over the website, which is otherwise considered to be one of the chief aspects making the technology ideal for propelling activism.

Singapore Window showcases, perhaps reluctantly, the tremendous influence that the political circumstances in Singapore have, even on expressions of democracy from outside the boundaries of the city-state.

Although projections of the internet as a significant democratic tool cannot be dismissed lightly, it remains to be seen if expatriate websites such as Singapore Window can grow to play an important role in the democratisation process.

Tomorrow: Final article in the series - The limits of civil society

More articles in 'A new Singapore' series

MAYA RANGATHAN is a former journalist with the Indian Express . She recently submitted her PhD to the School of Political and Social Inquiry, Monash University.

Malaysiakini is publishing a 12-part series by different writers on the challenges facing Singapore as new leader Lee Hsien Loong takes the helm. These articles are edited by James Gomez, coordinator of the Monash Asia Institute's Singapore Studies project on civil society.