I am not a computer person . But as a Singapore who has read the printed government mouth piece media for a few decades ,I find the new sites that is sprouting up over the past 1 or 2 years offering alternative views a good read which sometimes help common Singapore to voice the uncaring or unnecessary policies and widespread social issues not reported by the braddel whores. I have to admit it takes some time to get used to reading news on the computer monitor. Younger Singapoereans are excited about the internet age and the free up of the media landscape through the internet sites,which I think there are some good ones with decent contents such as The Online Citizen ,Public house and Temasek Review. There was once they even call themselves a check on the PAP.
there are trends you can't help but notice with these sites. They are reactive and feed on the emotions of PAP-hate but that is forgivable because the journalists from these websites do not have access to government data and first hand information. They can only assess based on parliament reports, parliament debates and newspaper reports. I am sure these new generation of anti PAP journalists are not invited to government press conferences. When Pritam Singh raised the idea of freedom of information act , i thought these sites should back them up as the realease of information can generate news articles.
With the recent slew of populist measures by the PAP, I sense a mood change that the people are feeling that the elites are listening. With such changes, how are these political social web going to survive with dwindling readership? I have to assume more readers means more income for them but i also think that they are not paid. I really not very sure how these full-time political social web's journalist going to feed their family . Let's be realistic - you cannot survive with ideals of checking the PAP and aiding the Opposition cause. Furthermore the PAP government strenghthened their grip on media with some laws that prohibits donations to these websites .
Is it fair to say that these websites are surviving on the edge if PAP is going to a good job? But one site stands out and that is technology comapny Yahoo . It is different from the others, its contents I feel is a less-pro-PAP Straitstimes , upgraded version of Temask Review, anti PAP and feeding on unhappy emotions.Unfortunately Yahoo contents are also reactive and not first hand news compared to Braddell whores. But at least the journalists are smart to join Yahoo at least they know they can be paid compared to the other political social web . But I read that Yahoo is not doing very well globally, I am not sure how the effects will trickle down to SIngapore's yahoo.
there are trends you can't help but notice with these sites. They are reactive and feed on the emotions of PAP-hate but that is forgivable because the journalists from these websites do not have access to government data and first hand information. They can only assess based on parliament reports, parliament debates and newspaper reports. I am sure these new generation of anti PAP journalists are not invited to government press conferences. When Pritam Singh raised the idea of freedom of information act , i thought these sites should back them up as the realease of information can generate news articles.
With the recent slew of populist measures by the PAP, I sense a mood change that the people are feeling that the elites are listening. With such changes, how are these political social web going to survive with dwindling readership? I have to assume more readers means more income for them but i also think that they are not paid. I really not very sure how these full-time political social web's journalist going to feed their family . Let's be realistic - you cannot survive with ideals of checking the PAP and aiding the Opposition cause. Furthermore the PAP government strenghthened their grip on media with some laws that prohibits donations to these websites .
Is it fair to say that these websites are surviving on the edge if PAP is going to a good job? But one site stands out and that is technology comapny Yahoo . It is different from the others, its contents I feel is a less-pro-PAP Straitstimes , upgraded version of Temask Review, anti PAP and feeding on unhappy emotions.Unfortunately Yahoo contents are also reactive and not first hand news compared to Braddell whores. But at least the journalists are smart to join Yahoo at least they know they can be paid compared to the other political social web . But I read that Yahoo is not doing very well globally, I am not sure how the effects will trickle down to SIngapore's yahoo.
Last edited:
