Why Temasek Review Article So Much the same as This One!!!

SPH: An insider speaks

November 8, 2009 by admin01

I had no illusions about the independence of the local media when I first started my job in StraitsTimes, under SPH.

I knew that my work would be edited, and possibly censored for political safety, and I was mostly fine with that – no media channel anywhere in the world is entirely free from some form of editorial trimming, after all. But there is such a thing as a free press but certainly not one in Singapore.

What I didn’t bargain for was individual self-censorship, unspoken policies and rules, and the stoutness with which people swallowed their journalistic dignity and integrity (because it does exist, even strongly, in some places) to toe the company line. Incredible as it seems, reporters in Singapore do have the same fierce pride in their work as reporters anywhere else; only pitifully and sadly they cannot demonstrate their beliefs. After all its a job.The omnipotence of the CPF.

Its on the cards that there will be a general election in 2010. It’s hard for me to swallow the indignation I feel whenever I see the local media doggedly ignoring its news sense. We have seen it all before. We will see it again. And again. We see it every day.

Articles and TV programmes are edited to balance out pro-opposition views; awesome camera opportunities – like the opposition rallies – are studiously left out of media coverage; banal and unfair quotes and tactics are highlighted and headlined simply because they are tools of the ruling party and the lap-dog media will comply. But the truth will out. The voting public are not as blind as they seem. For those that WILL get the chance to vote, that is.

There are many things journalists see that the eyes of the public are not privy to, and that we would like to report on but can’t. Please remember that when you read an article or watch a broadcast that seems particularly, emetically subjective.

And help spread the word that a lot of us in the media are sorry that we can’t do the job we want to. It may not mean a lot to you, but it sucks for us that for every day, people’s opinions of us plummet – despite the fact that we work our asses off in 14-hour days with no breaks on weekends or public holidays to bring you OUR (or it THEIR) version of the news. We are just doing a job..for THEM.

And for those who think it’s as easy as quitting your jobs and following your conscience – grow up. This is a job. It puts food on our tables. We can all get up and leave, but it’s ridiculously easy to replace us with more party-line-spouting drones. And it’s also likely that we’re doing something about it, in our own little ways, even if it’s as small as writing about and expressing our dissatisfaction with the system from the inside. But we cant tell you about it.

After all, walls have ears inside here too. And some of those ears are positioned to hear everything, sometimes for some who want to just get on with company at the expense of dobbing their own friends. But that is another sad story.

Clearly the pressure coming from the head is overwhelming, and it is no surprise whatsoever that that pressure should translate down the chain, so that the executives chastise the editors, the editors chastise the journalists, and so on, if anyone steps out of line, and that perpetuates self-censorship because ‘you might as well mutilate your own article before they get to it, and in any case there’s no point in drawing attention to yourself’.

Will it make some people squirm after reading this.

Doubt it. There is no soul.

EDITOR’s NOTE: This article is contributed by a reader with the moniker helplessinsingapore, copied verbatim. Readers are advised to excercise discretion as to the authencity of the information contained herein since the contributor is not the original writer of the article.

Click to expand...

A Message from a Media Insider
I had no illusions about the independence of the local media when I first started my job as a [------] in Singapore. I knew that my work would be edited, and possibly censored for political safety, and I was mostly fine with that - no media channel anywhere in the world is entirely free from some form of editorial trimming, after all.

What I didn't bargain for was individual self-censorship, unspoken policies and rules, and the stoutness with which people swallowed their journalistic dignity and integrity (because it does exist, even strongly, in some places) to toe the party line. Incredible as it seems, reporters in Singapore do have the same fierce pride in their work as reporters anywhere else; I think this is especially evident in sections of the media that don't touch on politics.

But when it comes to political news, particularly something as sensitive as the elections, many of us leave our brains and consciences at home and resign ourselves to doing what we're told and writing what's being dictated. To some extent I appreciate the rationale of this - there really is a very close watch being kept on the media and when we're kept in line it's largely for our own safety.

However, as someone still young and naive and idealistic, it's hard for me to swallow the indignation I feel whenever I see the local media doggedly ignoring its otherwise sharply-honed news sense. Articles and TV programmes are edited to balance out pro-opposition views; awesome camera opportunities - like the opposition rallies - are studiously left out of media coverage; banal and unfair quotes and tactics are highlighted and headlined simply because they are tools of the ruling party.

There are many things journalists see that the eyes of the public are not privy to, and that we would like to report on but can't. Please remember that when you read an article or watch a broadcast that seems particularly, emetically subjective. And help spread the word that a lot of us in the media are sorry that we can't do the job we want to. It may not mean a lot to you, but it sucks for us that for every day that we covered the elections, people's opinions of us plummeted - despite the fact that we worked our asses off in 14-hour days with no breaks on weekends or public holidays to bring you our version of the news.

And for those who think it's as easy as quitting your jobs and following your conscience - grow up. This is a job. It puts food on our tables. We can all up and leave, but it's ridiculously easy to replace us with more party-line-spouting drones. With educated and politically aware journalists in the local media, at least civil society in Singapore stands a fighting chance. So despise and condemn us all you like, but whatever you believe in, it's highly likely we believe in it too. And it's also likely that we're doing something about it, in our own little ways, even if it's as small as writing about and expressing our dissatisfaction with the system from the inside.

Don't give up on us. We haven't given up on our ideals.

Click to expand...

MarrickG said:

This was being mentioned in other forums...

Why Temasek Review's article "SPH: An insider speaks" published on 8 Nov 09 is so similar to another article by Gayle Goh titled "A Message from a Media Insider" dated 09 May 06?

You compare and decide for yourself:

From Temasek Review:

http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/11/08/sph-an-insiders-confession/

From Gayle Goh:

http://i-speak.blogdrive.com/archive/157.html

Click to expand...

MarrickG said:

This was being mentioned in other forums...

Why Temasek Review's article "SPH: An insider speaks" published on 8 Nov 09 is so similar to another article by Gayle Goh titled "A Message from a Media Insider" dated 09 May 06?

You compare and decide for yourself:

From Gayle Goh:

http://i-speak.blogdrive.com/archive/157.html

Click to expand...

MarrickG said:

I see that they edited the article...

Click to expand...

MarrickG said:

I see that they edited the article...

Click to expand...

Lee's ill advice only spreads mistrust

* Source: Global Times
* [02:34 November 04 2009]
* Comments

By Wu Meng

On October 28, Lee Kuan Yew, the Minister Mentor of Singapore, met with US President Barack Obama during his visit to the US.

Lee stated that the US should stay engaged not just in China but in the whole of East Asia and India, adding that the US would risk losing global leadership if it did not remain engaged in Asia to "balance" China's military and economic might.

As the founding father of Singapore, Lee has been regarded as a friend of the Chinese people not only because he is a fourth-generation Chinese Singaporean, but also because Singapore has played an important role in Asian affairs in the last few decades. As a result, Lee's comment came as a surprise to a lot of Chinese people.

Lee, an advisor in his son Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's cabinet, expressed his concern over China's military buildup, which he said "might not necessarily be aimed at a conflict over Taiwan."

A country with many specialists and think tanks on military issues, the US does not need Lee to give it advice on its role in Asia, nor does it seem in need of Lee's warning that the US should "strike a balance" in Asia. The "China Threat" theory from a Singaporean of Chinese descent aroused much controversy and criticism in China.

As an island city-state located at the southern tip of the Malay Peninsula, Singapore plays an important role in the economy of Southeast Asia. However, Lee's comments on China's role in Asia indicate the concern and worry Singapore has toward China's increasing influence in the area.

During Lee's term as prime minister from 1965 to 1990, he was a key US ally and built a close relationship between the US and Singapore. But as a veteran politician, Lee must know that it is overall national strength that determines a country's position and influence.

Lee's negative comments toward China may have a misleading effect and will inevitably harm Sino-Singaporean relations.

In times lacking mutual trust, an influential politician like Lee should be focusing on building mutual trust instead of spreading mistrust.

China has gained influence and respect by developing its own strength over the last few decades, both militarily and economically.

It's understandable that this might sometimes lead to concerns among its neighbors, who were used to a relatively insular and weak China. Many countries also remember Chinese dominance of the region in the past.

However, China's growing power shouldn't be a source of concern to other Asian nations. Unlike rising powers in the past, China is focused on integrating itself into a stable regional and world system, not disrupting it.

China's large borders and security concerns mean that it needs commensurate military power, but its defense ambitions have always been focused on self-protection, not threatening others.

Concerns over "balance" are misplaced, and serve only to foster unnecessary paranoia.

Click to expand...

MM Lee’s ill-timed advice only spreads mistrust

November 5, 2009 by Manisha
Filed under Opinion

Leave a comment

OPINION

Lee Kuan Yew, the Minister Mentor of Singapore, met with US President Barack Obama during his visit to the US.

Lee stated that the US should stay engaged not just in China but in the whole of East Asia and India, adding that the US would risk losing global leadership if it did not remain engaged in Asia to “balance” China’s military and economic might.

As the founding father of Singapore, Lee has been regarded as a friend of the Chinese people not only because he is a fourth-generation Chinese Singaporean, but also because Singapore has played an important role in Asian affairs in the last few decades. As a result, Lee’s comment came as a surprise to a lot of Chinese people.

Lee’s negative comments toward China may have a misleading effect and will inevitably harm Sino-Singaporean relations.

In times lacking mutual trust, an influential politician like Lee should be focusing on building mutual trust instead of spreading mistrust.

Lee’s negative comments toward China may have a misleading effect and will inevitably harm Sino-Singaporean relations.

In times lacking mutual trust, an influential politician like Lee should be focusing on building mutual trust instead of spreading mistrust. China has gained influence and respect by developing its own strength over the last few decades, both militarily and economically.

It’s understandable that this might sometimes lead to concerns among its neighbors, who were used to a relatively insular and weak China. Many countries also remember Chinese dominance of the region in the past.

However, China’s growing power shouldn’t be a source of concern to other Asian nations. Unlike rising powers in the past, China is focused on integrating itself into a stable regional and world system, not disrupting it.

China’s large borders and security concerns mean that it needs commensurate military power, but its defense ambitions have always been focused on self-protection, not threatening others.

Concerns over “balance” are misplaced, and serve only to foster unnecessary paranoia.

Click to expand...

scroobal said:

Gosh, even MPs like Michael Palmer and SPH Geoffrey Pereira can actually read this without realising how bogus this guy is.

Click to expand...

vamjok said:

are you a lecturer or something that has the access to the anti plagiarism software?

Click to expand...