It is not because they do not know how to use the Internet to push their views or there are any draconian laws scaring them away.

These were the conclusions of a panel of media experts, lawyers and cyber-activists, who discussed the topic, Freedom Of Digital Speech: Testing Boundaries In Singapore, at the Grand Copthorne Waterfront Hotel yesterday.

The discussion was one of the highlights on Day Two of the four-day Asian Media Information and Communication Centre annual conference.

The event, held together with the inaugural World Journalism Education Congress, has attracted more than 400 media experts and journalists from 45 countries.

Other topics discussed yesterday included the use of Chinese blogs by foreign correspondents reporting on developments in China, and the role of the Internet in Japanese suicide pacts.

The reason Singaporeans have not taken to the Internet to champion their concerns, said Institute of Policy Studies senior research fellow Tan Tarn How, is that they are a generally pragmatic lot more concerned with their 'rice bowls' than questions of 'political freedom'.

It certainly helps, added Mr Tan, that 'this is a government that has delivered', and that allows Singaporeans to do as they please in pretty much every other aspect of their lives - except politics.

Gay activist Alex Au, who runs the Yawningbread.org blog, concurs with this assessment.

He believes that 'the gay (community's) use of the Internet may have exploited a window of opportunity presented by the 'light touch' policy'.

The Government had previously stated that it would regulate the Internet with a 'light touch'.

As their reach was more narrow than the mainstream media like newspapers or TV, they would be given more leeway when discussing sensitive issues.

But just because the Government does not crack down on cyber-dissidents, does not mean it cannot, said National University of Singapore law lecturer Tey Tsun Hang.

The Government may have a 'light touch', but would-be cyber-activists should remember that it does wield a 'big stick', warned the former district judge, pointing to the case of two young bloggers here who were convicted and jailed under the Sedition Act for making racist remarks online in 2005.

Mr Au, however, believes that as long as cyber-activists stick to non-political activism - animal rights or the problems facing single mothers, for instance - they will not share the racist bloggers' fate.

They can thank the Government's pragmatism for this, he said.

A high-profile crackdown on such online discussion would wreck its campaign to woo high-level foreign talent to Singapore, he said, and this was too much of a risk for it to take.

chuahh@sph.com.sg