Skip to main content

The By-election: Han’s ignorance, MSM reporting, and PAP’s problem



“Watch out for the mainstream media and check on their reports on Punggol East by-election.” This is the message Low Thia Kiang, WP secretary-general, wants Punggol East voters to pay special attention to.  

And this has to do with ignorance, reporting and problem of the PAP.

Han’s ignorance

Here, I am talking about Han Fook Kwang’s “The dirty truth about Singapore” (Sunday Times 30 Dec 2012).  Many see this as a wake-up call for the PAP and Singapore. I see this as a well-covered ignorance in both real innocence and intended or pretended act. 

The article talked about his experience in Taiwan and his positive comments about Taiwan.

Taipei or Taiwan as a large picture is not an unfamiliar name to us.  And a former editor of the Straits Times said:
<Truth is I didn't know very much about Taiwan, not having visited for more than 20 years - I was last there on a brief news assignment.  >
Taiwan is one of the Asian dragons like us. Our editor from a government controlled mainstream newspaper said he knew little about Taiwan.  Then how about ordinary people, how do we expect Singaporeans to have a clearer and fuller picture of Taiwan?  

Singapore achieves high economic growth, so do Taiwan.  Economic development is vital to Singapore and we fail to understand economic developments of others.  This is a serious ignorance that shows even our journalists are not aware of happenings in other countries – even our competitors.   

If this is true, well informed people, like the Straits Times editor, don’t know or don’t care about events happening in other countries, Singapore will be in great trouble.  We know we can no longer base our future growth on low cost factors and yet we refuse to know the real development outside Singapore.

This is a frightening ignorance of MSM or a pretended one.

For Han, it is even more frightening to learn that he does read and watch Taiwan news. But he still does not know the real happenings there until his visit there recently. This is what he said in his article:
<Much of what I knew came from reading the papers and watching the news on television, and it was mostly negative - the unruly politics, fist fights in Parliament, and headline-grabbing melodramatic elections (remember the mysterious shooting of then President Chen Shui-bian a day before the 2004 presidential election?). >
Does he read only the government approved newspapers and news channels? I don’t know is it related to the failure of our bilingualism or not?  Most likely, people in the top only read news sources on Taiwan in one language – English. So, there is an excuse for being ignorance.

Intended or pretended ignorance

Perhaps, there is an agenda behind it.  There is a policy to cover news that the government wants it to be.  The intended negative impression of Taiwan reported in our MSM is to mislead Singaporeans.  So, the MSM has to pretend and avoid the positive side of Taiwan story.

This selective reporting is not uncommon. Here is an example:

A poll is just a small survey after all 
<Responding to this, Straits Times editor Warren Fernandez said the paper would co-operate with any police investigation into the report. He said: "Our reporters spoke with residents in Punggol East to get their comments and a sense of the ground for our election reports. This was not a full-scale survey, or scientific poll, by any means."The headline for our story overstated the significance of the information gathered by calling it a poll. We are sorry for this lapse.">http://www.straitstimes.com/the-big-story/punggol-east-election/story/elections-department-says-police-looking-st-report-2013011

When police wants to investigate the case, the Straits Times then pretends its ignorance.  This pretended innocence and intended reporting have been practiced in the MSM for so many years!   Now, the Straits Times called it a “lapse”.   It is a lapse of pretended and intended ignorance.  

Ignorance cannot cover PAP’s problem

When people have more sources to read the news, the MSM ignorance will be exposed.  The reporting of AIM in the MSM is one example. If the MSM has done a job on fair reporting on AIM then there will be less comment in the social media and perhaps, PM Lee can avoid calling a review of town council management.

When we read the ‘no sympathy votes’ from PAP candidate, Dr Koh Poh Koon before nomination day, we think he is a hero. However, he has since stopped saying this anymore. When you compare his behavior before and after nomination day, you may assess his ignorance is a real or an intended/pretended one. 

Now, the MSM projects Dr Koh is running the by-election campaign as a one-man show. He continues to walk the ground alone as he had done in the days before.  It seems to suggest he has done his campaign alone longer since he was nominated by the PAP.

Of course, sometimes, we also receive some funny ignorance:

Heng Swee Keat: Vote PAP to make WP work harderhttp://www.singapolitics.sg/news/heng-swee-keat-vote-pap-make-wp-work-harder
By-election campaigning has been conducted with dignity: Ng Eng Hen
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1248973/1/.html
 PAP man prefers to run his own show
http://www.asiaone.com/News/Latest%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20130118-396431.html

You will see more intended and pretend ignorant reporting when you read the MSM the next time.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting ...

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...

对话一定要有共识吗?还是求取多元性来丰富自我?

全国对话喊到现在还一直高喊全国要有共识,尤其是全国对话的结果就是要寻求新加坡人的共识。不然,行动党就会说,我国的政治将会出现分裂,新加坡就变成一个不团结的国家。 全国对话一定要取得共识吗?文明对话的目的难道就是为了取得全国共识吗?如果是共识,那就一定有取舍。是不是说强势的人就领头共识,而落势的就落得一无所有。这不又走回老路,一条行动党独大的旧政治框框吗?看来,行动党对于过去,仍然依依不舍,行动党的共识,就是国家的共识,新加坡人的共识。 对话是要加深双方的了解,尊敬并且互相学习,吸取对方的优点,填补自己的缺点。这就是多元性的好处。然而全国对话的结果,如果只是强求共识,而忽略多元性和不同的意见,甚至否定他人的意见,那么,这个共识,是否具建设性,破坏性,还是分裂性,那就很难说了。 行动党似乎忘记了多元性。文明的对话并不是要把自己的 意见,信仰和理念强加给对方。即使这些意见,信仰和理念都是好的,善的。但是,对方未必会欣赏,未必会接受。因此,对话的结果应该是吸取对方的意见,改进自己的治国方针,然后,交给人民去决定,而这个决定也不过是大多数人的共识,而不可能是全国人民百分百的共识。 (乐观的看,行动党的全国对话,也不过是改进自己的治国方针,通过自己的小圈圈,自我讨论,研究,更新和改良行动党的政治策略,然后,在下一次大选时,拿出来让选民决定。因此,所谓的共识,在全国人民还没有决定前,仍然不是全国大多数人的共识。很可惜,行动党原本应该通过全国对话这个平台,吸收更多对手的意见,不同的观点,将它们纳入自己的政治策略中,然后在大选中让选民选择这个纳入反对意见的新政纲。可惜的是,行动党没有这个雅量,也或许根本看不起反对的意见。因此,它只能企图通过全国对话,硬要说这是全国共识。所以,充其量这只能说是行动党小圈圈的改良版政治策略,绝对不能说是全国共识。) ‘己所不欲,忽施于人’我们不喜欢的,不要强加他人身上。同样的,我们喜欢的,也不可以强加于他人身上。例如,有些人不喜欢吃有些食物,我们却很喜欢吃这类食物,但是,我们要尊重个人的喜好,不要强迫他人接受我们的建议。了解了这点,下一回提供食物时,就会通过多些选择,而不是只提供自己喜欢的食物。这点一般新加坡人都有这个敏感度,我们会了解马来族的要求,尽量避免他们敏感的食物。 为何行动党过去能够了解国人...