SINGAPORE – The 10 fake news sites blocked on Oct 22 in Singapore may appear innocuous and authentic, but they have likely been primed to launch disinformation campaigns, signalling the need for greater public awareness to spot them, said experts.
Describing the fake news sites as “sleeper websites”, Associate Professor of Law Eugene Tan of SMU’s Yong Pung How School of Law, said the foreign actors behind them are likely playing the long game and can easily weaponise the sites for a disinformation campaign when the need arises.
On Oct 22, the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) ordered internet service providers, including Singtel, M1 and StarHub, to block access to the 10 sites using provisions under the Broadcasting Act.
The sites masqueraded as Singapore news sites by spoofing or using terms associated with Singapore in their domain names and incorporating familiar local features and visuals. They also carried content on Singapore, some of which was generated by artificial intelligence tools.
Mr Benjamin Ang, head of digital impact research at NTU’s S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), said that these sites feature mostly news and lifestyle stories to create the appearance of credibility. It would be challenging for the public to tell if they are fake.
“Thus, it is important for us to think carefully before sharing individual stories, especially those that are emotive or sensitive, regardless of how many ‘news’ sites we might see them appear on,” said Mr Ang.
The 10 blocked websites have used local-sounding domain names and local images in an effort to look authentic, and the public needs to up their game where media literacy is involved, Mr Ang added.
By signing up, I accept SPH Media's Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy as amended from time to time.
Although the websites have not mounted any hostile information campaign against Singapore, they could potentially be used to do so in future, said MHA in response to media queries on Oct 22.
And their pre-emptive takedown shows that government agencies are alert to the potential threat these fake websites pose to Singapore’s social fabric, said Dr Shashi Jayakumar, the executive director of geopolitical consultancy firm SJK Geostrategic Advisory.
“When the orchestrator decides to ramp up operations for its own reasons, this trust and credibility (built up thus far) can be further leveraged as the originator might seem to be a genuine news source,” added Dr Jayakumar.
Prof Tan noted that it would be impossible to block access to all fake news sites. Recognising that the blocking is symbolic in nature, he said the move acts more as a signal to the public that threats posed by such foreign fake websites are real.
For instance, one of the blocked sites, Alamak.io – which uses the Singapore-associated colloquial expression of shock – published commentaries on sociopolitical issues, including one that falsely alleged that Singapore had allowed other countries to conduct their biological warfare research activities here.
The same site also carried paraphrased versions of Singapore-related news articles published by local mainstream media.
Mr Ang said that the blocking would raise public awareness that the blocked sites, although seemingly local, are part of a foreign network found responsible for influence operations.
The blocked websites are:
1. zaobaodaily.com
2. singaporeinfomap.com
3. Singaporeera.com
4. Singdaotimes.com
5. Todayinsg.com
6. Lioncitylife.com
7. Singapuranow.com
8. Voasg.com
9. Singdaopr.com
10. Alamak.io
Dr Jayakumar said many of the sites appeared to be pro-China, while Alamak.io seemed to have a pro-Russian slant.
For instance, Alamak.io has carried several commentaries by Russia’s Ambassador to Singapore Nikolay Kudashev, including one on colonialism, which was retweeted by the Russian Embassy in Singapore.
The site’s articles have also been reposted by Mr Kudashev on his Facebook account, including a memorial piece he had written on Soviet Union civilians who had died during World War II.
Prof Tan suggests that it is likely that foreign states behind the websites operate through intermediaries such as public relations firms.
Mr Ang said research by RSIS has traced some of these sites to networks maintained by public relations companies, complete with price lists. This means that a client can pay the network to post 100 copies of a story on 100 sites, which can then be shared through social media to create the illusion that the story is true, he added.
This process, according to the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, is known as information (or disinformation) laundering, where the network creates its own echo chamber by sharing a fake story or false narrative that might eventually be boosted into the mainstream news ecosystem, which helps amplify the reach of the story.