- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
The same old trick of giving a label to the FAP's critics. What's new?[h=2][/h][h=2]TR Emeritus’ response to Straits Times article on anti-foreigner sentiments[/h]
June 22nd, 2012 |
Author: Editorial
The Straits Times article, ('Anti-foreigner sentiments stir bloggers to action', 21 June 2012).
The Straits Times published an article (‘Anti-foreigner sentiments stir bloggers to action’) yesterday (21 Jun), reporting about several bloggers, worried by the rise in anti-foreigner sentiments among Singaporeans, planning to launch two projects separately to help foster a sense of understanding.
In one of the projects, about 16 bloggers plan to launch a YouTube chat show on national issues, called Online/Offline. The show is expected to start next month, with xenophobia as the opening topic of discussion.
Straits Times then interviewed one of the bloggers, Mr Ravi Philemon, the former editor of TOC and wrote the following:
The editors at TRE would like to categorically put on record that TRE IS NOT an anti-foreigner or xenophobic site.
Indeed, TRE would like to thank Mr Philemon for his clarifications on his blog [Link]:
What is xenophobia exactly? Here are the definitions from some of the dictionaries:
As highlighted by reader KTK [Link], Singapore currently has 36% of foreign population compared to France’s 17% and UK’s 10%. We have the third highest population density (7,148 per sq km) in the world, after Macau and Monaco. In the words of reader KTK: “We are packed like sardines everywhere we go”. Does highlighting these facts make one anti-foreigner? Perhaps in the eyes of the mainstream media, any mentions of foreigners by the alternative media will automatically be deemed “xenophobic”?
In fact, it can be observed that most Singaporeans are not anti-foreigners or xenophobic. Most are just unhappy with the government’s over-liberal policies in the last few years resulting in the over-influx of foreigners into the country. Such over-influx has dire consequences on Singaporeans and Singapore:
It must be remembered that for the many decades, Singaporeans have been living harmoniously with the many Malaysians working in Singapore. If Singaporeans are really xenophobic, they would have objected to the presence of Malaysians in Singapore decades ago. This is not the case. Singaporeans are only complaining over the last few years when the government decided to open the floodgates after GE 2006, as can be seen in this graph (data from DOS):
.
TRE editors are therefore saddened by the anti-foreigner insinuation thrown at TRE from the mainstream media, The Straits Times.
.
p.s. In case the Straits Times did not know, our Singapore editor, Richard Wan, is part of the “Online/Offline” project as well. He will be participating in one of the topics of discussion: Press freedom in Singapore.
The Straits Times article, ('Anti-foreigner sentiments stir bloggers to action', 21 June 2012).The Straits Times published an article (‘Anti-foreigner sentiments stir bloggers to action’) yesterday (21 Jun), reporting about several bloggers, worried by the rise in anti-foreigner sentiments among Singaporeans, planning to launch two projects separately to help foster a sense of understanding.
In one of the projects, about 16 bloggers plan to launch a YouTube chat show on national issues, called Online/Offline. The show is expected to start next month, with xenophobia as the opening topic of discussion.
Straits Times then interviewed one of the bloggers, Mr Ravi Philemon, the former editor of TOC and wrote the following:
“There are websites that seem to be driving these ultra-nationalist, anti-foreigner sentiments, and when you see something like that, you get worried,” he (Mr Philemon) said. “I’ve also heard friends remark about foreigners. They feel they have lost out in work and school to them.”
Mr Philemon declined to identify the websites. But online sites such as The Temasek Times and TR Emeritus often highlight the issue of foreigners in Singapore.
Even though Mr Philemon did not name any of these anti-foreigner or xenophobic websites at the time of the interview, Straits Times later ’subtly’ slipped in the line, “…TR Emeritus often highlight the issue of foreigners in Singapore”, and published the article. Reading the above quoted text as a whole, Straits Times is implying that TR Emeritus (TRE) is one of such anti-foreigner or xenophobic sites.Mr Philemon declined to identify the websites. But online sites such as The Temasek Times and TR Emeritus often highlight the issue of foreigners in Singapore.
The editors at TRE would like to categorically put on record that TRE IS NOT an anti-foreigner or xenophobic site.
Indeed, TRE would like to thank Mr Philemon for his clarifications on his blog [Link]:
“In that sense I think that it is rather unfortunate that TR Emeritus was mentioned as one of the online sites which ‘highlight the issue of foreigners in Singapore’. Taken in the context of the article written, it could be read that TR Emeritus (TRE) is driving xenophobia in Singapore. I disagree with that.
I know at least two editors from TRE (one in person, and the other through email conversations), and I know that TRE has taken great pains to differentiate itself from its predecessor. The editors of TRE have also communicated in online and offline platforms that their website is about reflecting (not driving) ground sentiments, which may mean that the issues of foreigners in Singapore which is highlighted in their website, could very well be an actual reflection of what’s happening in society.”
It is true that TRE did highlight the various issues of foreigners in Singapore but does that make TRE an anti-foreigner or xenophobic website? TRE write articles to highlight these issues because they reflect the current ground sentiment of the Singapore public – that people are unhappy with the government’s over-liberal foreign immigration and labour policy.I know at least two editors from TRE (one in person, and the other through email conversations), and I know that TRE has taken great pains to differentiate itself from its predecessor. The editors of TRE have also communicated in online and offline platforms that their website is about reflecting (not driving) ground sentiments, which may mean that the issues of foreigners in Singapore which is highlighted in their website, could very well be an actual reflection of what’s happening in society.”
What is xenophobia exactly? Here are the definitions from some of the dictionaries:
• Thefreedictionary.com – “unduly fearful or contemptuous of that which is foreign, especially of strangers or foreign peoples.”
• Merriam-Webster – “fear and hatred of strangers or foreigners or of anything that is strange or foreign.”
• Dictionary.com – “an unreasonable fear or hatred of foreigners or strangers or of that which is foreign or strange.”
• Collins English Dictionary – “hatred or fear of foreigners or strangers or of their politics or culture.”
• The American Heritage Dictionary – “fear and contempt of strangers or foreign peoples.”
Let’s get one thing straight. TRE has never asked or encouraged anyone to be fearful of, to show contempt to or to hate foreigners. Straits Times seems to be confused between being anti-foreigner and being critical of government’s over-liberal foreign immigration and labour policy.• Merriam-Webster – “fear and hatred of strangers or foreigners or of anything that is strange or foreign.”
• Dictionary.com – “an unreasonable fear or hatred of foreigners or strangers or of that which is foreign or strange.”
• Collins English Dictionary – “hatred or fear of foreigners or strangers or of their politics or culture.”
• The American Heritage Dictionary – “fear and contempt of strangers or foreign peoples.”
As highlighted by reader KTK [Link], Singapore currently has 36% of foreign population compared to France’s 17% and UK’s 10%. We have the third highest population density (7,148 per sq km) in the world, after Macau and Monaco. In the words of reader KTK: “We are packed like sardines everywhere we go”. Does highlighting these facts make one anti-foreigner? Perhaps in the eyes of the mainstream media, any mentions of foreigners by the alternative media will automatically be deemed “xenophobic”?
In fact, it can be observed that most Singaporeans are not anti-foreigners or xenophobic. Most are just unhappy with the government’s over-liberal policies in the last few years resulting in the over-influx of foreigners into the country. Such over-influx has dire consequences on Singaporeans and Singapore:
- Job competition
- Depression of wages
- Infrastructure overload (e.g. overcrowding in trains, buses, hospitals, polyclinics etc)
- Escalation of HDB resale prices
- Competition for places in education institutions
- Decrease in productivity
- Increase in TB diseases
- Increase in social tensions
- Etc
It must be remembered that for the many decades, Singaporeans have been living harmoniously with the many Malaysians working in Singapore. If Singaporeans are really xenophobic, they would have objected to the presence of Malaysians in Singapore decades ago. This is not the case. Singaporeans are only complaining over the last few years when the government decided to open the floodgates after GE 2006, as can be seen in this graph (data from DOS):
TRE editors are therefore saddened by the anti-foreigner insinuation thrown at TRE from the mainstream media, The Straits Times.
.
p.s. In case the Straits Times did not know, our Singapore editor, Richard Wan, is part of the “Online/Offline” project as well. He will be participating in one of the topics of discussion: Press freedom in Singapore.
