Dr Vincent Oh, a psychology lecturer at the Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS), said the proliferation of alternative viewpoints via social media platforms may have also contributed to growing distrust towards leaders.
While not inherently a bad thing as freedom of opinion and expression is “fundamental to any democracy”, Dr Oh said that it also means contrarian views – or even conspiracy theories in more extreme cases – get more air-time, and people are more easily and widely exposed to these viewpoints.
These could thus lead to some overall shifts in attitudes towards mainstream media and narratives, he added.
Dr Shannon Ang, a sociologist at the Nanyang Technological University (NTU), also highlighted that trust in specific people and trust in institutions are “conceptually distinct”.
“What the results may suggest is simply that while people’s trust in leaders may falter, they seem to continue to believe in the structures and processes that have been put in place,” said Dr Ang.
In some cases, high trust in institutions may even moderate the effects of low interpersonal trust, he added.
Nevertheless, Dr Ang cautioned that this trust should not be taken for granted, and that untrustworthy leaders can ultimately still erode trust in institutions over time.
“It seems we are not seeing those effects yet, but that doesn’t mean it won’t happen.”
REBUILDING TRUST
On the one hand, experts say a growing distrust in leaders could lead people to be more critical of what they are told, to check and assess information for themselves, and to demand greater transparency and accountability.
On the other hand, a breakdown of trust between leaders and society could erode institutional trust over time, resulting in more potential for conflict, less willingness to pay taxes, and so on, said Dr Ang from NTU.
If distrust is left uncorrected and people continue to believe that leaders are purposely trying to mislead them, Assoc Prof Tan from NUS said they may eventually vote to replace these leaders, or even the institution.
To overcome this distrust, leaders would do well to show willingness to gather feedback – including ones that are negative to them – and act on these, communicate transparently, ensure their actions align with their words, and take accountability in the event of any wrongdoings, said experts.
For those feeling left behind as technology and society change, Dr Gillian Koh, senior research fellow at the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS), said: “In Singapore, the narrative is often that business disruption due to technological change and even improvements will mean that workers will lose their jobs if they do not retrain.
“There is much less of a narrative of how technology is likely to create new jobs, add value to old jobs, or help existing workers with their current work. So most stories are skewed towards the ‘change or die’ angles.
“Unless you are younger, more tech-savvy, interested in innovation and have a positive outlook on science and technology, the mass base of people feel threatened by that sort of change.”
Dr Oh from SUSS said that a perceived lack of choice likely also plays a major role in why some respondents might feel left behind by society and technology changes.
“As one example, when the shift to SimplyGo was initially announced, there was no ‘opt-out’ option and it was mandated. People may perceive that many societal and technological changes are unilaterally forced upon them,” said Dr Oh.
As such, empowering individuals to have greater autonomy, and providing alternatives wherever possible, would likely smoothen the rollout of any such changes for many individuals.
Ultimately, people and leaders responsible for making those changes should also be mindful that there would be people who have difficulties catching up, said Assoc Prof Tan from SUSS.
Leaders must therefore communicate understanding and assurance, and provide the necessary assistance to help these individuals level up, he added.
OTHER KEY FINDINGS
The Edelman study found that more Singapore respondents worry about the following compared to the year before:
- Job loss (93 per cent), up from 90 per cent
- Hackers (80 per cent), up from 73 per cent
- Climate change (75 per cent), up from 70 per cent
- Nuclear war (72 per cent), up from 68 per cent
- Inflation (72 per cent), up from 71 per cent
- Information war (55 per cent), up from 50 per cent
