Former SPH senior editor Bertha Henson delivers scathing remarks on state of journalism in Singapore

[Voldermort]

Dear people in the media,


You DO realise what is happening to you right? You are being sidelined by the biggest newsmaker in Singapore, the G, which also happens to be supporting your operation with State funds. You’ve never had much of a say in media-G relations, but god knows your predecessors tried. And we were lucky that politicians at the time know the value of a credible media, even as they try to hem us in in other ways. They know that they need to get out there and answer questions. They were quick to hold press conferences (as opposed to the briefing which is a kind of gag order which the media doesn’t seem to know how to negotiate). They were okay about taking questions at the sidelines.


Now they ignore you entirely, in the hope that no answers mean no story. They tell you to look at their FB pages which you do so dutifully because you’re afraid to miss any pearls of wisdom. They go on TikTok and have their own mock interviews on YouTube done by their ministry minions. They hold “doorstop’’ interviews so as to look casual but we all know it’s only because they have something to say - not because you have something to ask.


Now it looks like you’ve lost the fight and are completely resigned to playing the role of publicist. Not only that, you seem to have forgotten basic journalistic principles and I mean stuff like grammar and housestyle and getting the 5Ws1H. You’ve descended to repeating press releases which are themselves badly written. I was very concerned with the deterioration of journalistic standards, the ability to write a story with a strong angle, clearly and concisely. I wondered if journalists forgot that the news is “out there’’, the need to build a network of contacts and how reporting is the basis of all your writing. I sure hope you don’t believe your own propaganda about how wonderful you are at your work. I will say you are clearly deluded if you think so.


But now I can’t blame you if you lose heart in the news-gathering process (as well as the freedom to decide how to put the news across) and decide to quiet quit, or just plain quit.


For Singapore, the plethora of laws and the demise of some alternative media only serve to make sure that one voice remains as the purveyor of truth and collective opinion. A voice that isn't "moderated'' by anyone. Increasingly, journalists don’t think it’s their place to ask certain questions or to bother officials, in case they are being tagged as “unfriendly’’. And there are no other types of journalists to irritate the G into responding (They moved abroad or lost heart).


I find it ironic that despite being a public trust, you’re not looking to get the public on your side. I thought any deterioration of professional standards could be reversed at least slightly since the public trust is not so closely tied to the fortunes of the parent company and its board. But the opacity of your operations and governance process only serves to confirm that it is business-as-usual…and thanks for the money.

More at https://shrtcô.de/PCuG8i

 

[laksaboy]

It's a totalitarian shithole, what did you expect? There are no journalists on this island, only propagandists.

 

[birdie69]

It's a totalitarian shithole, what did you expect? There are no journalists on this island, only propagandists.

You must understand who is the payroll master of these jlb SPH journalists and editors, the readers don't pay them salary.

 

[maxsanic]

Dear people in the media,


You DO realise what is happening to you right? You are being sidelined by the biggest newsmaker in Singapore, the G, which also happens to be supporting your operation with State funds. You’ve never had much of a say in media-G relations, but god knows your predecessors tried. And we were lucky that politicians at the time know the value of a credible media, even as they try to hem us in in other ways. They know that they need to get out there and answer questions. They were quick to hold press conferences (as opposed to the briefing which is a kind of gag order which the media doesn’t seem to know how to negotiate). They were okay about taking questions at the sidelines.


Now they ignore you entirely, in the hope that no answers mean no story. They tell you to look at their FB pages which you do so dutifully because you’re afraid to miss any pearls of wisdom. They go on TikTok and have their own mock interviews on YouTube done by their ministry minions. They hold “doorstop’’ interviews so as to look casual but we all know it’s only because they have something to say - not because you have something to ask.


Now it looks like you’ve lost the fight and are completely resigned to playing the role of publicist. Not only that, you seem to have forgotten basic journalistic principles and I mean stuff like grammar and housestyle and getting the 5Ws1H. You’ve descended to repeating press releases which are themselves badly written. I was very concerned with the deterioration of journalistic standards, the ability to write a story with a strong angle, clearly and concisely. I wondered if journalists forgot that the news is “out there’’, the need to build a network of contacts and how reporting is the basis of all your writing. I sure hope you don’t believe your own propaganda about how wonderful you are at your work. I will say you are clearly deluded if you think so.


But now I can’t blame you if you lose heart in the news-gathering process (as well as the freedom to decide how to put the news across) and decide to quiet quit, or just plain quit.


For Singapore, the plethora of laws and the demise of some alternative media only serve to make sure that one voice remains as the purveyor of truth and collective opinion. A voice that isn't "moderated'' by anyone. Increasingly, journalists don’t think it’s their place to ask certain questions or to bother officials, in case they are being tagged as “unfriendly’’. And there are no other types of journalists to irritate the G into responding (They moved abroad or lost heart).


I find it ironic that despite being a public trust, you’re not looking to get the public on your side. I thought any deterioration of professional standards could be reversed at least slightly since the public trust is not so closely tied to the fortunes of the parent company and its board. But the opacity of your operations and governance process only serves to confirm that it is business-as-usual…and thanks for the money.

More at https://shrtcô.de/PCuG8i

Singapore media being tightly controlled is a well-known fact, but what I dislike is Bertha Hanson's blatant history revisionism and mischaracterization of the Singapore media in the past.

From my own observation, the state media in the past during LKY & GCK times was even worse in terms of control and government influence (who can forget that famous TNP front page depicting the Cheng San GRC WP candidates as racists). One can say Singapore media now is perhaps no better than before but definitely not worse.

Bertha herself was part of the even more tightly controlled government machinery in the past and now that she has gone freelance, is completely revising history to the younger generation by portraying herself as some sort of freedom fighter who used to keep the government at bay while the current crop of her counterparts are losers and cowards who have allowed the Singapore media to slip even further than her time.

Nice try lady.

 

[bobby]

Singapore’s Ranking Drops To 160 On World Press Freedom Index​

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has recently ranked Singapore’s press freedom 160 out of 180 in the 2021 World Press Freedom Index.

RSF is a non-profit organisation that states their mission is to preserve the freedom of information around the world, as well as to protect journalists.

This may come as a surprise to you – or not – but the irony here is that news about our ranking was notably absent on our mainstream media.

ST published an article regarding the 2021 press freedom index, but omitted any mention of Singapore. Meanwhile, Channel NewsAsia and TODAY chose not report on the 2021 World Press Freedom ranking at all.

This censorship didn’t go unnoticed by netizens on /r/Singapore, with many in this thread calling out the biggest local publications for failing to mention Singapore’s new ranking.

Singapore ranks 160 in World Press Freedom Index 2021​

According to the report, we were ranked 158 in 2020, meaning we dropped another 2 places this year.

Source

Right at the bottom are Turkmenistan and North Korea, which feature dictatorial governments with severe crackdowns on dissent plus full control over media.

What RSF claims​

In their justification for their ranking of Singapore in the “very bad” category, RSF mentions the suing of critical journalists and the pressuring of critics into being out of a job or even making them leave the country.

RSF has also said that The Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) has the power to censor any journalistic content as they see fit.

They claim that defamation suits are common, and those on the receiving end have taken to crowdfunding to help pay for the fees.

Why didn’t our mainstream media cover this story?​

One reason could be to avoid putting attention on media censorship in Singapore. In previous years, articles on Singapore’s placement on the RSF index have become a sore point with the public and ammunition for critics of our government.

Another reason might be because our mainstream media outlets consider this ranking not credible – or in cruder terms, “fake news”.

The rankings on the index are not determined in the most objective way – they are compiled from a survey of questions asked of media professionals, lawyers and sociologists.

And there appears to be oddities in the rankings. RSF noted that in 2021, over 24 journalists have been imprisoned in Myanmar.

And we also know in recent developments, Myanmar’s junta has shut off the internet to restrict the flow of information in the country. Yet, Myanmar is ranked at 140, twenty places ahead of Singapore – where such atrocities are inconceivable.

Malaysia, which RSF has also alleged to have similar media controls as Singapore, comes in at rank 119. Meanwhile, China has been ranked 4th from the bottom on the list, at 177.

Referring to their methodology and their ranking of other countries, Singapore’s relative placement at 160 does seem peculiar.

How accurate is the Word Press Freedom Ranking Index?​

Statements RSF has made about Singapore like “The authorities have also started sending journalists emails threatening them with up to 20 years in prison if they don’t remove annoying articles and fall into line” seem “divorced from reality“.

A phrase we are borrowing, used by Minister K Shanmugam in a 2010 speech when commenting about the ranking of Singapore done by the RSF back then.

We’ll also like to state that as an alternative news publisher in Singapore with over 100 million pageviews annually, we’ve never in our history received any of this purported regulation or threats of prison time. We’ve also never received anything close to a POFMA notice.

But there isn’t any doubt that our Singapore media does censor certain stories. Recent examples would be the omission of the successful Leong Sze Hian and Roy Ngerng crowdfunding cases in our mainstream media – stories which were covered in detail by international titles like Bloomberg and SCMP.

The non-coverage stands out like a sore thumb and does make us look like we would not rank highly on the press freedom index.

There are some truths in what RSF have said. We do have POFMA, and in recent years, two of our citizens have been sued for defamation.

But much of this exaggerates the situation we’re in. While we deserve a lower ranking than some developed countries, a rank of 160 is quite a stretch and doesn’t seem to reflect reality.

 

[blackmondy]

Trying to be world savior after now after wilfully working inside the shit hole ?

 

[bobby]

Bertha Henson

She worked at the Singapore Press Holdings for 26 years where she was primarily an editor for the English newspaper, The Straits Times

Education	Bachelor of Arts and Social Sciences
Alma mater	National University of Singapore

 

[LexLuthor]

Singapore’s Ranking Drops To 160 On World Press Freedom Index​

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has recently ranked Singapore’s press freedom 160 out of 180 in the 2021 World Press Freedom Index.

RSF is a non-profit organisation that states their mission is to preserve the freedom of information around the world, as well as to protect journalists.

This may come as a surprise to you – or not – but the irony here is that news about our ranking was notably absent on our mainstream media.

ST published an article regarding the 2021 press freedom index, but omitted any mention of Singapore. Meanwhile, Channel NewsAsia and TODAY chose not report on the 2021 World Press Freedom ranking at all.

This censorship didn’t go unnoticed by netizens on /r/Singapore, with many in this thread calling out the biggest local publications for failing to mention Singapore’s new ranking.

Singapore ranks 160 in World Press Freedom Index 2021​

According to the report, we were ranked 158 in 2020, meaning we dropped another 2 places this year.

Source

Right at the bottom are Turkmenistan and North Korea, which feature dictatorial governments with severe crackdowns on dissent plus full control over media.

What RSF claims​

In their justification for their ranking of Singapore in the “very bad” category, RSF mentions the suing of critical journalists and the pressuring of critics into being out of a job or even making them leave the country.

RSF has also said that The Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) has the power to censor any journalistic content as they see fit.

They claim that defamation suits are common, and those on the receiving end have taken to crowdfunding to help pay for the fees.

Why didn’t our mainstream media cover this story?​

One reason could be to avoid putting attention on media censorship in Singapore. In previous years, articles on Singapore’s placement on the RSF index have become a sore point with the public and ammunition for critics of our government.

Another reason might be because our mainstream media outlets consider this ranking not credible – or in cruder terms, “fake news”.

The rankings on the index are not determined in the most objective way – they are compiled from a survey of questions asked of media professionals, lawyers and sociologists.

And there appears to be oddities in the rankings. RSF noted that in 2021, over 24 journalists have been imprisoned in Myanmar.

And we also know in recent developments, Myanmar’s junta has shut off the internet to restrict the flow of information in the country. Yet, Myanmar is ranked at 140, twenty places ahead of Singapore – where such atrocities are inconceivable.

Malaysia, which RSF has also alleged to have similar media controls as Singapore, comes in at rank 119. Meanwhile, China has been ranked 4th from the bottom on the list, at 177.

Referring to their methodology and their ranking of other countries, Singapore’s relative placement at 160 does seem peculiar.

How accurate is the Word Press Freedom Ranking Index?​

Statements RSF has made about Singapore like “The authorities have also started sending journalists emails threatening them with up to 20 years in prison if they don’t remove annoying articles and fall into line” seem “divorced from reality“.

A phrase we are borrowing, used by Minister K Shanmugam in a 2010 speech when commenting about the ranking of Singapore done by the RSF back then.

We’ll also like to state that as an alternative news publisher in Singapore with over 100 million pageviews annually, we’ve never in our history received any of this purported regulation or threats of prison time. We’ve also never received anything close to a POFMA notice.

But there isn’t any doubt that our Singapore media does censor certain stories. Recent examples would be the omission of the successful Leong Sze Hian and Roy Ngerng crowdfunding cases in our mainstream media – stories which were covered in detail by international titles like Bloomberg and SCMP.

The non-coverage stands out like a sore thumb and does make us look like we would not rank highly on the press freedom index.

There are some truths in what RSF have said. We do have POFMA, and in recent years, two of our citizens have been sued for defamation.

But much of this exaggerates the situation we’re in. While we deserve a lower ranking than some developed countries, a rank of 160 is quite a stretch and doesn’t seem to reflect reality.

Sinkies do not care about SPH ranking in the world, as long as they continue to be paid a steady salary, buy the next iPhone or Rolex, change to a new car and most importantly, prices of HDB flats appreciate.

 

[CPTMiller]

Lee believes the control is needed and most importantly who.to stop them? So eventually it works

 

[eatshitndie]

a “free” press means you can be freely infiltrated by foreign commie or nazi propagandists with agendas, and you pride yourself for being anally and vaginally wide open. anyone who believes in a “free” press is a moron. the only free press happens when you squeeze chiobu’s tits, and she refrains from accusing you of morest for over 69 years.

 

[TerrexLee]

https://shrtcô.de/PCuG8i

 

[searcher1]

The value of the newspaper is no longer the content written & printed
Its the paper itself ... it can be used to wrap vegetable & pack them in the fridge
Pet dog can shit on it indoor, saving the hassle of cleaning up
Children art & craft can be done on them, even painting of walls are useful with them

 

[mojito]

Nobody in the right mind would have ever referred to what sph does as journalism. Would any one today call RT news journalism? Simply delusional this lady!

 

[eatshitndie]

Nobody in the right mind would have ever referred to what sph does as journalism. Would any one today call RT news journalism? Simply delusional this lady!

and to think al jazeera is not state sponsored nor abc infiltrated by the dems nor bbc infiltrated by mi6 is regular happenstance at news outlets all over the world - is simply ludicrous.

 

[gutpunch]

Singapore’s Ranking Drops To 160 On World Press Freedom Index​

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has recently ranked Singapore’s press freedom 160 out of 180 in the 2021 World Press Freedom Index.

RSF is a non-profit organisation that states their mission is to preserve the freedom of information around the world, as well as to protect journalists.

This may come as a surprise to you – or not – but the irony here is that news about our ranking was notably absent on our mainstream media.

ST published an article regarding the 2021 press freedom index, but omitted any mention of Singapore. Meanwhile, Channel NewsAsia and TODAY chose not report on the 2021 World Press Freedom ranking at all.

This censorship didn’t go unnoticed by netizens on /r/Singapore, with many in this thread calling out the biggest local publications for failing to mention Singapore’s new ranking.

Singapore ranks 160 in World Press Freedom Index 2021​

According to the report, we were ranked 158 in 2020, meaning we dropped another 2 places this year.

Source

Right at the bottom are Turkmenistan and North Korea, which feature dictatorial governments with severe crackdowns on dissent plus full control over media.

What RSF claims​

In their justification for their ranking of Singapore in the “very bad” category, RSF mentions the suing of critical journalists and the pressuring of critics into being out of a job or even making them leave the country.

RSF has also said that The Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) has the power to censor any journalistic content as they see fit.

They claim that defamation suits are common, and those on the receiving end have taken to crowdfunding to help pay for the fees.

Why didn’t our mainstream media cover this story?​

One reason could be to avoid putting attention on media censorship in Singapore. In previous years, articles on Singapore’s placement on the RSF index have become a sore point with the public and ammunition for critics of our government.

Another reason might be because our mainstream media outlets consider this ranking not credible – or in cruder terms, “fake news”.

The rankings on the index are not determined in the most objective way – they are compiled from a survey of questions asked of media professionals, lawyers and sociologists.

And there appears to be oddities in the rankings. RSF noted that in 2021, over 24 journalists have been imprisoned in Myanmar.

And we also know in recent developments, Myanmar’s junta has shut off the internet to restrict the flow of information in the country. Yet, Myanmar is ranked at 140, twenty places ahead of Singapore – where such atrocities are inconceivable.

Malaysia, which RSF has also alleged to have similar media controls as Singapore, comes in at rank 119. Meanwhile, China has been ranked 4th from the bottom on the list, at 177.

Referring to their methodology and their ranking of other countries, Singapore’s relative placement at 160 does seem peculiar.

How accurate is the Word Press Freedom Ranking Index?​

Statements RSF has made about Singapore like “The authorities have also started sending journalists emails threatening them with up to 20 years in prison if they don’t remove annoying articles and fall into line” seem “divorced from reality“.

A phrase we are borrowing, used by Minister K Shanmugam in a 2010 speech when commenting about the ranking of Singapore done by the RSF back then.

We’ll also like to state that as an alternative news publisher in Singapore with over 100 million pageviews annually, we’ve never in our history received any of this purported regulation or threats of prison time. We’ve also never received anything close to a POFMA notice.

But there isn’t any doubt that our Singapore media does censor certain stories. Recent examples would be the omission of the successful Leong Sze Hian and Roy Ngerng crowdfunding cases in our mainstream media – stories which were covered in detail by international titles like Bloomberg and SCMP.

The non-coverage stands out like a sore thumb and does make us look like we would not rank highly on the press freedom index.

There are some truths in what RSF have said. We do have POFMA, and in recent years, two of our citizens have been sued for defamation.

But much of this exaggerates the situation we’re in. While we deserve a lower ranking than some developed countries, a rank of 160 is quite a stretch and doesn’t seem to reflect reality.

but dunno y this year somehow went up to 139 leh strange

 

[zhihau]

The value of the newspaper is no longer the content written & printed
Its the paper itself ... it can be used to wrap vegetable & pack them in the fridge
Pet dog can shit on it indoor, saving the hassle of cleaning up
Children art & craft can be done on them, even painting of walls are useful with them

the best cleaning material for glass!

 

[gutpunch]

the best cleaning material for glass!

yah windows become very shiny (think from the wax), really if don't believe u all try and see

 

[mudhatter]

from her prior experience, she's in a good position to comment on this. there's merit to her remarks, no doubt. not for no reason is stinkypura 160th ranked media.

 

[Leongsam]

She tried to shut down Singapore's last bastion of free speech. Hypocrites never prosper.

---

Should Sammyboy be shut down?

Jul 09, 2015 12.00PM | Yen Feng


by Yen Feng

THIS is a website the writer deemed so foul he refused to name it in his story: “We are not naming the forum to avoid giving it more publicity.”

No naming, but there’s plenty of shaming in today’s TNP cover story, in which columnist David Sun shines a light on some of the shenanigans that goes on in Singapore’s best-known sex site, Sammyboy.

From trading smut to sharing sex videos for “reputation points”, it’s the kind of erotic filth bound to make any moralist erect with disgust. Said Sun: “The forum is a hotbed of sleaze where users discuss the commercial sex scene in Singapore and Malaysia, and trade sex videos and pictures online like trading cards.

“Anyone visiting the site can see the smut it peddles.”

Last week, two men were sentenced to 12 weeks’ jail for uploading their upskirt videos to the site. The judge called the forum “a thriving community of like-minded and depraved individuals… commenting on each other’s perverse handiwork.”

More from a psychiatrist quoted in the report: “… people are only as sick as their secrets… It’s usually the younger adults and lonely people who don’t get natural or real sex who develop such fetishes.”

The report has stirred up a question that has existed for as long as the site’s 15-year history: If it’s so bad, why haven’t the authorities shut it down?

The responses have been somewhat limp, at best: MDA said it “may take action” if it finds content that breach Singapore’s laws; police said they would act only if a police report is made.

The time it would take to investigate these reports might not seem worth it. Said a criminal lawyer: “It might take nothing short of getting Interpol involved and even then, it might take years.”

Professor Tan Cheng Han, chairman of the Media Literacy Council, said Internet users, as a community, should not put up with such dubious content, and should object by reporting such sites to the relevant authorities.

Netizens have taken the discussion online – though, quite a number seem more interested in viewing and downloading said filth than debating the merits of free speech and morality.

Should Sammyboy be shut down? What do you think?

 

[Leongsam]

Former SPH senior editor Bertha Henson delivers scathing remarks on state of journalism in Singapore​

in Current Affairs

Dear people in the media,

You DO realise what is happening to you right? You are being sidelined by the biggest newsmaker in Singapore, the G, which also happens to be supporting your operation with State funds. You’ve never had much of a say in media-G relations, but god knows your predecessors tried. And we were lucky that politicians at the time know the value of a credible media, even as they try to hem us in in other ways. They know that they need to get out there and answer questions. They were quick to hold press conferences (as opposed to the briefing which is a kind of gag order which the media doesn’t seem to know how to negotiate). They were okay about taking questions at the sidelines.

Now they ignore you entirely, in the hope that no answers mean no story. They tell you to look at their FB pages which you do so dutifully because you’re afraid to miss any pearls of wisdom. They go on TikTok and have their own mock interviews on YouTube done by their ministry minions. They hold “doorstop’’ interviews so as to look casual but we all know it’s only because they have something to say - not because you have something to ask.

Now it looks like you’ve lost the fight and are completely resigned to playing the role of publicist. Not only that, you seem to have forgotten basic journalistic principles and I mean stuff like grammar and housestyle and getting the 5Ws1H. You’ve descended to repeating press releases which are themselves badly written. I was very concerned with the deterioration of journalistic standards, the ability to write a story with a strong angle, clearly and concisely. I wondered if journalists forgot that the news is “out there’’, the need to build a network of contacts and how reporting is the basis of all your writing. I sure hope you don’t believe your own propaganda about how wonderful you are at your work. I will say you are clearly deluded if you think so.

But now I can’t blame you if you lose heart in the news-gathering process (as well as the freedom to decide how to put the news across) and decide to quiet quit, or just plain quit.

For Singapore, the plethora of laws and the demise of some alternative media only serve to make sure that one voice remains as the purveyor of truth and collective opinion. A voice that isn't "moderated'' by anyone. Increasingly, journalists don’t think it’s their place to ask certain questions or to bother officials, in case they are being tagged as “unfriendly’’. And there are no other types of journalists to irritate the G into responding (They moved abroad or lost heart).

I find it ironic that despite being a public trust, you’re not looking to get the public on your side. I thought any deterioration of professional standards could be reversed at least slightly since the public trust is not so closely tied to the fortunes of the parent company and its board. But the opacity of your operations and governance process only serves to confirm that it is business-as-usual…and thanks for the money.

The 4G leaders aren't on your side. They want only their messages heard loud and (un)clear. I bet that they see the media as a hindrance if it goes about doing the job they are supposed to do. Now I think they see the media as a wonderful mechanism to convey any message or narrative that they see fit. That’s why they hold closed door dialogues etc and continue to trot out that old chestnut about how having reporters will stop people from being frank - as though it’s something to be encouraged. And they think they are doing everyone a favour by giving a briefing on what happened later. Or they summarise the “findings’’ in a report or they tell you how many pieces of “feedbacks’’ they have. And you duly repeat that there has been extensive public consultation and intensive reviews. You have no part to play in building a community of civic-minded citizens unafraid to speak up. In fact, you have to be an MP to get questions answered.

As for the 4G leaders’ constant exhortations about the need to build trust, I ask that they look at how the media plays a role in building trust. The G can cite its track record, mouth platitudes about honesty and good governance. Remember that we only know the G from what we READ everyday, and that most people do hope that the media plays the role of asking questions that they themselves might have. The more “cut-and-paste’’ there is, the faster the erosion of the credibility of the media. And when the media can’t even spell right or is sloppy about the details, then they aren’t even good enough to be a teaching tool for language.

I ask that the journalists hold the line, and put professional principles into practice. You do NOT always have to do what the G says. You should tell readers about the obstacles you face in getting information. You should list the questions you want answered. You should behave like a public trust, not a public agency. And that is actually IN the G's interest too.