Agenda AWANI: Debat MRSM Se-Malaysia

Government Position: Ban Political Parties from Campaigning on Social Media During Elections
📌 The government team defined "Banning" as limiting access for political parties to promote themselves on social media during elections.
⚖️ The primary objective is to ensure fairness and equality for smaller political parties who lack the funding of major parties to leverage social media advantages (e.g., advertisements).
⏳ The proposed mechanism involves a temporary solution with a five-year awareness period before phased implementation, followed by a national survey on effectiveness.
🔥 A key argument for the ban is the need to reduce extremism and hate perpetuated by over-zealous supporters in the online environment, aiming for a calmer, more unified nation.

Opposition Position: Against Banning Political Parties from Campaigning on Social Media
🌍 The opposition argues that social media is a free app and everyone has an equal chance to gain popularity, criticizing the government's argument that funding provides an unfair advantage.
🔄 The opposition stresses the need for political parties to adapt to the era of social media ("survival of the fittest") just as corporations and news outlets (like New Straits Times) have adapted.
🗣️ Banning campaigning inhibits an informative culture by preventing continuous, traceable discussions and data retention (via features like search and comments) that help citizens fact-check politicians.
📣 The alternative solution proposed by the opposition is to implement strict guidelines for political content rather than imposing a total ban or limiting access.

Clash Points and Rebuttals
🤝 The government argues that the opposition agrees with their core idea of limiting access, despite arguing against a "ban," thus undermining their own position.
💰 The government maintains that major parties use their superior funding to dominate advertising and visibility, regardless of social media being "free" to use initially.
🧐 The opposition counters that social media algorithms are based on user searches and interests, not just spending, meaning smaller parties can still be seen if their content aligns with voter searches.
🛑 The government views social media extremism as more dangerous due to lower real-life consequences (e.g., less likelihood of police intervention compared to physical protests).

Key Points & Insights
➡️ The central conflict is between ensuring equality for smaller entities (Government) versus freedom of adaptation and expression in the current technological landscape (Opposition).
➡️ The Government's proposed ban is framed as a temporary solution contingent on a future survey to measure its benefit in leveling the political playing field.
➡️ The Opposition advocates for strict guidelines to curb misinformation and extremism, arguing that adaptation and continuous, trackable online discourse lead to a better-informed electorate.
➡️ A significant point raised is the danger of monolithic press/influence when major parties dominate online spaces, drowning out smaller voices despite the platforms being technically free to access.

📸 Video summarized with SummaryTube.com on Feb 14, 2026, 15:45 UTC