It's not about total enforcement, it's about chilling the desire for anyone to start a blog, to the point that the effect is the same as if they were able to enforce it.
Singapore has had strong defamation laws in effect for awhile now, which have been able to make a mark on public discourse with a few select enforcement actions:
> But in recent weeks, lawyers acting on behalf of key Singapore leaders have delivered sharp legal warnings to dissenting blogs, saying the blogs published untruths and defamatory comments. Although editors of the blogs have retracted the posts and in some cases apologized, academics have said the cases nevertheless could have a chilling effect on writers at a time when they’re just beginning to enjoy new freedoms following years of restrictions defended by the government as necessary for maintaining social stability.
>
>In one case, lawyers acting on behalf of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong issued a five-page letter to prominent public affairs blog Temasek Review Emeritus, accusing it of posting a “defamatory” opinion piece that contained comments related to the appointment of Mr. Lee’s wife, Madam Ho Ching, as the head of Singapore sovereign wealth fund Temasek Holdings. The piece had asserted she received the appointment because of political connections, which the government says is untrue.
>
> The letter asked the website to retract the post and issue an apology, both of which it did days later.
One blog at a time. It's not difficult to imagine there are a few government people looking for unauthorized blogs, or the ability to report an unauthorized blogger.
Singapore was one of the earliest adopters of a national firewall (back in the late 90s). I am sure this will be the primary tool in monitoring any 'misuse' of the Internet by the powers that be.
Bo
