1. What is the motivation behind Intelligent Singaporean? What made you start this aggregator?

The first reason is straightforward and utilitarian--I started the aggregator because I was searching for an easy way to access opinion pieces from the blogosphere, and I did not find any convenient way to do so. I also felt that it would be useful if I could go to a single site to find quality opinion pieces. And since I was probably not the only one looking for commentary, so IS grew out of a basic need that I did not find fulfilled on the internet, and that I felt I could attempt to meet.

The second reason is more philosophical--you might have noticed that the first version of IS was started just as Mr Miyagi decided to leave Today. In other words, IS was initiated in the aftermath of the establishment's authoritarian dismissal of Mr Brown's article in Today. I was outraged at Bhavani's criticism of Mr Brown and the subsequent suspension of his column by Today. To me, these actions by the state and mainstream media were, quite simply, rather unintelligent. Instead of writing letters to the press expressing these sentiments, I felt I could do something about the situation, and IS was the outcome of that desire to actually do something.

Mr Wang articulated similar sentiments in a post after discovering IS, and what he said is worth recollecting here:

The nature of the blogosphere, however, is that it is fringe media and it is not necessarily very easy for the Uninitiated Masses to find their way through the maze of the Black Empire into the Alternative Shining Universe. Yes, there is word-of-mouth and yes, there is individual hyperlinking (which is why Mr Wang dutifully and regularly hyperlinks to worthy posts) but surely there can be improvements.

Tomorrow is not the answer. It could have been, but the noise-to-signal ratio is too high and too much of what's posted is .... well, let's just say that it wouldn't emancipate any minds. Ping.sg is an interesting possibility, but at the moment my feel is that it will develop the same problem as Tomorrow.

The answer is some kind of aggregator that focuses on serious posts about real issues in Singapore. And just as I thought of that, I found someone who just started doing that too.

2. What is a normal day like for you to aggregate the content for a post in IS?

A typical day running IS is quite straightforward. I simply go through my feedreader, which is updated by a collection of about a hundred blogs and news sources. This list of blogs has been built up gradually over the past few months. Depending on the period of the year and whether there is a hot topic circling on the internet, the number of articles I go through daily ranges anywhere from 40-120. Most of these articles are not commentary related - you will find only about 5-10 articles posted daily on IS. The ones that are not interesting are skipped over quickly. Meanwhile, the ones I find interesting are tagged. After having read several thousand blog posts, I have developed a knack for "smelling" whether a post is likely to be interesting after reading its title and the first paragraph. The tagged articles are compiled into list of links by my feedreader, which I then sometimes reorganize before I post them on IS. On average the entire process takes me about 20-30 minutes a day, sometimes longer if I have the time to go through articles in depth or if a particular post causes me to stop and think.

Running IS is, I would imagine, not very different from the role of a news producer for a traditional newspaper, who thumbs through the news wires to select newsworthy articles for publication.

3. What are the criteria you apply in determining whether a post eligible for your daily reads?

It is difficult to articulate precisely what the selection criteria are. Some articles just make me go 'wow' and others simply do not interest me. In short, if I enjoyed reading a post and found that it expanded my horizons, and that I feel that others should be exposed to it, I include it on IS.

Things I look for:

(a) Substantive content: I look for articles with something substantive and unique to say, and which are not just regurgitations of ideas easily available elsewhere. It is not necessary that they be particularly profound or complex, but a genuine expression of some deeply felt opinion.

(b) Length of article: The post is not too short, and not too long--readers can have a short attention span (I do) and can lose interest easily if posts are too long. Conversely, a post that is too short is often not worth spending time on.

(c) Clarity: The post is clear about its subject and is not convoluted--it is not abstruse, and is easy for a layman to read and understand, yet causes him to stop and think.

(d) Passion: The best articles are written by bloggers who have a passion and conviction for what they are saying and are not writing for attention or accolade, although these come naturally to those who write well. Whether or not I agree with certain opinions, I have a respect for someone who can stand up for he/she believes in and can articulate his/her thoughts in a readable manner.

(e) Concern about the future of Singapore: Also, one thing I look for is concern for the betterment of Singaporean society. Despite what some may think, I feel that many bloggers have a genuine concern for the future of Singapore. An article which is able to demonstrate such a concern definitely gets my thumbs up.

As an aggregator, I do not feel that the role of IS is to push a particular agenda, apart from the promotion of reasoned discourse and exchange of ideas and opinions. As such, the aggregation of these major events is so that interested readers can have a comprehensive overview of the major opinions expressed in the blogosphere surrounding these events. Article selection more or less follows the regular selection criteria: readable, unique, and substantive.

5. In the case of encountering an interesting article which may border on being seditious and defamatory, how do you make the call to place a link to the article? Have you encountered any for that matter?

Frankly, I haven't really come across many published posts that are seditious or defamatory. I think by and large the blogosphere polices itself well and if a post is aggravating, posts expressing opinions of displeasure and/or outrage rapidly surface in response. When that happens, it is easy to avoid featuring these posts on IS.

6. What are your thoughts about the other aggregators, for example, Singapore Surf, Tomorrow and Ping.SG? Do you see them as potential competitors?

I do not really see these aggregators as competitors. In fact, these sites are also sources on my feedreader. I enjoy reading the articles that Tomorrow features, admire the consistency with which Singapore Surf is run (I feature it on my sidebar), and appreciate the technology behind Ping.SG. I think we all serve different niches on the blogosphere and can coexist peacefully.

7. Is IS a rewarding experience for you? What lessons have you learnt from this project?

IS has definitely been rewarding for me. It is certainly humbling to read the articles of excellent writers--and has made me realize how much I have to learn. It is also rewarding to be able to have my horizons expanded--reading blogs often involves discovering my ignorance.

Besides that, the opportunity to meet other bloggers and exchange emails with like minded people is a heartening experience, but most of all I am glad that many people have found IS useful.

8. Who are your favourite bloggers or blogger groups in the Singapore Blogosphere?

My personal favourite writer is Xenoboy, although there are plenty of other excellent writers. Singapore Angle, of course, is the most prominent blogger group.

9. Where do you see the Singapore blogosphere going from all the recent incidents? What kind of lessons do you think that the bloggers should draw to move ahead?

It is difficult to make predictions about a medium that is young, undergoing rapid growth, and is still in a state of technological flux. Overall I think the Singaporean blogosphere has had a positive impact on Singapore society, despite some hiccups it may have had along the way. It has allowed ordinary Singaporeans to express themselves to a wide audience and to engage in discussions with others that they would not otherwise have met. It also allowed people to get rapid and unexpected responses to the ideas and thoughts that they publish, thus expanding their horizons; I think Wee Shu Min will certainly agree to this.

Blogs provide a freer and less restrictive medium compared to the mainstream media in Singapore which is known for its boundaries. The blogosphere is also home to quite a few artists and provides an outlet for creative expression that would not otherwise be available to Singaporeans. It has also allowed more political engagement between MPs and ordinary citizens, see e.g. P65 and George Yeo's blog.

I see all these trends developing further in the days to come. I expect more Singaporeans, young and old, to take up blogging. As the internet grows and gains widespread acceptance and as more Singaporeans become comfortable with blogging, I see the blogosphere potentially challenging the mainstream media as a centre of discourse. As writers grow and mature, and as the people in the blogging community engage each other more, I think we can expect many good ideas to emerge, ideas that can be helpful to Singapore society.

I think the internet has provided a platform for Singaporeans to engage each other about society in a spontaneous, bottom-up manner that does not depend on government initiation or intervention. While some may use this freedom less responsibly, I think by and large bloggers have shown that they know how to use the freedom of expression that the internet has provided in a responsible and productive manner.

10. What are your future plans for IS?

As has been from day 1, I take things one step at a time. I never expected IS to be this popular, and I think the future holds many other unexpected things. I just hope to continue running IS in the spirit that it was originally founded upon, and trust that it will continue to have a future.

Acknowledgments: The authors also acknowledge input from Tan Tarn How, Institute of Policy Studies.