One strand of thought we gathered from watching the past 8 days of Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods hearings is that if there’s fake news posted online, it should be addressed or removed quickly (they say one, not we say one).
Alternative news journalist Kirsten Han had earlier alerted the public to what she deemed was a misrepresentation of her statements during the hearing.
Han subsequently lodged a formal complaint, including with it facts backing her stand.
“The horribly unfair Summary of Evidence from my session on 27 March is *still* sitting on the Parliament website. I’ve received acknowledgement from Mr Seah Kian Peng, the acting chair, that he has got my complaint and that he will share it with the Committee and “revert in due course”. But that’s just not good enough, because I’m not sure how long “due course” will be, and meanwhile that Summary will continue to be public and present a highly inaccurate view of what actually happened.”
Furthermore, something like this doesn’t seem like it needs the Committee to deliberate—I‘ve provided excerpts of the transcript that demonstrate that the summary does not reflect what I actually said. Surely this is something the parliamentary clerks who put the summaries together have to deal with? (Unless the Committee is the one that writes and issues the summaries…?)
I’ve heard nothing from the parliamentary staff or the actual Chair, Mr Charles Chong.
I understand it is a public holiday weekend but this is a matter of some urgency.”
Han said in an update that the committee has acknowledged her complaint and is investigating, but the report has been left online even as the incident is being investigated.
“Mr Seah said in an email I received in the afternoon that the Parliament Secretariat is looking into it and will “revert as soon as we can”. But I don’t have a timeline as to how long that will take, and the summary is *still* there.”
This is Han’s rebuttal of the summary report.