• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

SDP calls for dialogue with SPH editors

metalslug

Alfrescian
Loyal
http://yoursdp.org/index.php/news/singapore/4415-sdp-calls-for-dialogue-with-sph-editors

SDP calls for dialogue with SPH editors
Wednesday, 15 December 2010
Singapore Democrats

newspaper.jpg


Patrick Daniel
Straits Times

Walter Fernandez
Today

Lim Jim Koon
Lianhe Zaobao

Mohd Guntor Sadali
Berita Harian

Nirmala Murugaian (Ms)
Tamil Mirasu

Dear Chief Editors,

The general elections are on the horizon and, as with elections both in Singapore and elsewhere, the media play a crucial role in reporting the news and views of the various contesting parties. As one of these parties the SDP is naturally concerned, as we have been for decades, with the state of the press in Singapore.

I write to propose a dialogue about how, in particular, your newspapers will cover this elections and also, more generally, how the media situation in Singapore can be improved.

I acknowledge that there cannot be perfect fairness in this imperfect world. But that's not license for those in government to monopolise power which includes control of the media. Fairness is an ideal which we must strive to approximate even though we may never be able to attain it.

With this in mind I hope that we can start this conversation by my asking a few questions that are, I am sure, in the minds of many a Singaporean:

One, how do you feel about the situation given the fact that you operate under the purview of the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act (NPPA) which effectively gives the PAP a monopoly of the media in Singapore? As journalists, are you trying to change the situation or are you comfortable with the status quo?

Two, in this changed environment with the advent of new media tools, do you think the coverage of the coming elections will be any different from previous ones? If yes, how will your newspapers adapt to such changes?

Three, we understand that on-the-ground reporters are doing their utmost to report as fairly as they can about the opposition but are constrained by heavy editing from their superiors. Is this true?

The above questions notwithstanding, I would like to, for a start, make a few proposals that might help improve the politico-media situation in Singapore:

First, reserve a column in your newspapers for political parties to write a piece of their choice (policy position, party activity, comment on a current issue, etc) on a weekly rotation basis.

Second, organise a meeting with your editorial boards for us to discuss how coverage of the opposition, especially the SDP, can be fairer during the elections.

I have met editorial boards of the major newspapers all over the world including the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, Le Monde, The Guardian, Sydney Morning Herald, etc. However, I have yet to meet with any editorial boards of the stable of newspapers in the Singapore Press Holdings.

Third, invite party leaders to speak at Singapore Press Club (SPC). I have addressed the Foreign Correspondents' Association in Singapore and elsewhere on several occasions but never had the opportunity to do the same at the SPC. I think the political situation in Singapore would be greatly helped if such events were held.

Alternatively, we could invite you to speak at forums that we organise so that our party members and members of the public can better understand the position and role of the media in Singapore.

These questions and proposals are meant to be a starting point for a national conversation between the Singapore Democrats and the media which is long overdue.

As this matter is of public interest, I think it is only appropriate that I make this letter available on our website yoursdp.org and you are free to publish it in yours. I hope that our discussion can proceed in such an open format.

I anticipate your response. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Chee Soon Juan
Secretary-General
Singapore Democratic Party
 

Perspective

Alfrescian
Loyal
Whatever the mainstream media is, the SDP has been very hostile, the most hostile to be exact, towards its rookie reporters. This "meeting" comes across as strange.
 

cleareyes

Alfrescian
Loyal
The general elections are on the horizon and, as with elections both in Singapore and elsewhere, the media play a crucial role in reporting the news and views of the various contesting parties. As one of these parties the SDP is naturally concerned, as we have been for decades, with the state of the press in Singapore.

I write to propose a dialogue about how, in particular, your newspapers will cover this elections and also, more generally, how the media situation in Singapore can be improved.I

acknowledge that there cannot be perfect fairness in this imperfect world. But that's not license for those in government to monopolise power which includes control of the media. Fairness is an ideal which we must strive to approximate even though we may never be able to attain it.

With this in mind I hope that we can start this conversation by my asking a few questions that are, I am sure, in the minds of many a Singaporean:

One, how do you feel about the situation given the fact that you operate under the purview of the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act (NPPA) which effectively gives the PAP a monopoly of the media in Singapore? As journalists, are you trying to change the situation or are you comfortable with the status quo?

Two, in this changed environment with the advent of new media tools, do you think the coverage of the coming elections will be any different from previous ones? If yes, how will your newspapers adapt to such changes?

Three, we understand that on-the-ground reporters are doing their utmost to report as fairly as they can about the opposition but are constrained by heavy editing from their superiors. Is this true?


The above questions notwithstanding, I would like to, for a start, make a few proposals that might help improve the politico-media situation in Singapore:

First, reserve a column in your newspapers for political parties to write a piece of their choice (policy position, party activity, comment on a current issue, etc) on a weekly rotation basis.

Second, organise a meeting with your editorial boards for us to discuss how coverage of the opposition, especially the SDP, can be fairer during the elections.


I have met editorial boards of the major newspapers all over the world including the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, Le Monde, The Guardian, Sydney Morning Herald, etc. However, I have yet to meet with any editorial boards of the stable of newspapers in the Singapore Press Holdings.

Third, invite party leaders to speak at Singapore Press Club (SPC). I have addressed the Foreign Correspondents' Association in Singapore and elsewhere on several occasions but never had the opportunity to do the same at the SPC. I think the political situation in Singapore would be greatly helped if such events were held.

Alternatively, we could invite you to speak at forums that we organise so that our party members and members of the public can better understand the position and role of the media in Singapore.

These questions and proposals are meant to be a starting point for a national conversation between the Singapore Democrats and the media which is long overdue.

As this matter is of public interest, I think it is only appropriate that I make this letter available on our website yoursdp.org and you are free to publish it in yours. I hope that our discussion can proceed in such an open format.

I anticipate your response. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Chee Soon Juan
Secretary-General
Singapore Democratic Party

Is this a request or a demand?

If SDP is sincere about a dialogue, then why is the language so hostile? Why so belittling? why so narrow in possiblity of reply?

With this kind of letter, I dont see why SPH should and would hold any form of dialogue or direct comminication with SDP.

SPH has no obligation towards SDP when there is a lack of courtesy and politeness in SDP's letter and Chee had again showed his lack of EQ, only better, his lack of human touch in getting people to see things in his view, especially with those that has been against him.

and SDP do not represent the other political parties. Stop acting as if you are a leader when you have no follower to lead.
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
He is not writing to the SPH and he is not expecting anything from SPH. He is playing to the foreign gallery. Looks like funding is needed again. You actually took the trouble to analyse it.






Is this a request or a demand?

If SDP is sincere about a dialogue, then why is the language so hostile? Why so belittling? why so narrow in possiblity of reply?

With this kind of letter, I dont see why SPH should and would hold any form of dialogue or direct comminication with SDP.

SPH has no obligation towards SDP when there is a lack of courtesy and politeness in SDP's letter and Chee had again showed his lack of EQ, only better, his lack of human touch in getting people to see things in his view, especially with those that has been against him.

and SDP do not represent the other political parties. Stop acting as if you are a leader when you have no follower to lead.
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
Nothing strange. If you compare all the opposition parties that Singapore had over the years, SDP is most impressive in terms of materials, communication and activities to foreigners. His agenda has nothing to do with Singapore and this letter is is further indication of it. Remember he wrote to Obama.

There is a lady in Australia that has been receiving donations and funds from gullible young kids and blur adults over many years via website to save the Koalas. The impression in all the communications is that it is an endangered species which it is not and culling has been done in the past. When you are not a local, you have no idea what is happening.

https://www.savethekoala.com/

In the early years, the govt attempted to close her down but 20 years later, her political clout because of political donations has reached so high they actually awarded her an OAM.

The bulk of the donations comes from Japan, Germany and Canada while an Australian will think that she is mad. Her son is now learning the ropes.

Thats life.
 

cleareyes

Alfrescian
Loyal
He is not writing to the SPH and he is not expecting anything from SPH. He is playing to the foreign gallery. Looks like funding is needed again. You actually took the trouble to analyse it.

I know who he is playing such a manner for.

i m trying very very very hard tio ignore the very fact that Chee is doing all these as a show to those foregin "rights " group that Singapore has no rights.

are those groups that dumb? If they are, then they deserve to be as annoyance as they should be since many of them have no actual influence of any kind towards any country.

Chee want funding and attention, and that actually had made him a bargin puppet for those foregin "rights " group. That to me is a show of his lack of dignity
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
We have gone way past rights long time ago. Its a personal vendatta with the old man and his clan. The rights is to the sync in with the bleeding hearts of the west for the funds and the adulation.

Who in his right mind will write to the prostitutes in Toa Payoh brothel.



I know who he is playing such a manner for.

i m trying very very very hard tio ignore the very fact that Chee is doing all these as a show to those foregin "rights " group that Singapore has no rights.

are those groups that dumb? If they are, then they deserve to be as annoyance as they should be since many of them have no actual influence of any kind towards any country.

Chee want funding and attention, and that actually had made him a bargin puppet for those foregin "rights " group. That to me is a show of his lack of dignity
 

Dreamer1

Alfrescian
Loyal
I know who he is playing such a manner for.

i m trying very very very hard tio ignore the very fact that Chee is doing all these as a show to those foregin "rights " group that Singapore has no rights.

are those groups that dumb? If they are, then they deserve to be as annoyance as they should be since many of them have no actual influence of any kind towards any country.

Chee want funding and attention, and that actually had made him a bargin puppet for those foregin "rights " group. That to me is a show of his lack of dignity
There are some prostitues who after making some money may decide to slowly reduce the frequency of contacts,leading to eventual exit.

I hope Dr Chee reads the situation correctly although I know that he does not have such a fantastic record.

In any case,it provides an opportunity of learning to those brilliant political animals set to enter the fray.

"Singaporeans are not interested in politics?"sorry I do not buy that BS,90% of Chinese/Indian males are born political animals.

I also read that B G G.Yeo scolded the 154th "The Stratis Timnes should not give Wikileaks on our Foreign Ministry officials such prominent report"
 

cheekenpie

Alfrescian
Loyal
We have gone way past rights long time ago. Its a personal vendatta with the old man and his clan. The rights is to the sync in with the bleeding hearts of the west for the funds and the adulation.

Who in his right mind will write to the prostitutes in Toa Payoh brothel.

Who will you be voting for this GE?
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
Anyone except the PAP. Thats includes SDP or even a bicycle thief. Passing comments is one thing, getting the big picture right is another. Most Singaporeans are poor in understanding the concept of politics.

It is not a zero sum game.

Who will you be voting for this GE?
 

Char_Azn

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Anyone except the PAP. Thats includes SDP or even a bicycle thief. Passing comments is one thing, getting the big picture right is another. Most Singaporeans are poor in understanding the concept of politics.

It is not a zero sum game.

Question.

How is voting a bicycle thief into Parliament = "getting the big picture right":confused::confused::confused:
 

jw5

Moderator
Moderator
Loyal
Anyone except the PAP. Thats includes SDP or even a bicycle thief. Passing comments is one thing, getting the big picture right is another. Most Singaporeans are poor in understanding the concept of politics.

It is not a zero sum game.
I disagree with you and Perspective about voting for the "hypothetical figurative bicycle thief". (HFBT) Not TFBH. :biggrin:

Let's say you get 15 elected opposition MPs this time, and among them are 5 HFBTs.
The 5 through their speeches, lack of speeches, actions, behaviour, attitude, will give a bad impression of opposition MPs and even detract from the good work and efforts of the other 10. It will also give the pappies and the press a field day, lambesting these 5.
The voters will as usual be negatively impacted and the next time, there may not even be 10 opposition MPs.

All elected opposition MPs need to have some minimum qualities. He can be "worse than" the pap candidate he's contesting against, but he cannot be the worst ever candidate or a HFBT.
 

kukubird58

Alfrescian
Loyal
What is this?
SDP never invites Ah Leong Sam.
This is the biggest joke CSJ played.
See ah Sam no up.
See the bros and sis of Sammyboy no up
I am going to up him the next time I ran into him:oIo:
 

kukubird58

Alfrescian
Loyal
All elected opposition MPs need to have some minimum qualities. He can be "worse than" the pap candidate he's contesting against, but he cannot be the worst ever candidate or a HFBT.
Hahaha...u already knew that there are criteria to qualify to stand for erection. Take it as figuratively speaking lah.
The facts are:

About 30% die hard anti-papee, u put anybody to stand they will vote for opp.
About 40% solid papee supporters, they will always vote for papee.
About 30% swing voters who will decide the outcome.

Scroobal can be die hard anti-papee who will vote for a "bicycle thief", it doesn't mean that the bicycle thief will be elected.
It also doesn't mean that he is irrational.
He is just sending a signal to papee like the other people in this group.

Pse do not argue over the fine print whether it is 30% or 28% etc.
These are just indicative figures.
 

Perspective

Alfrescian
Loyal
I disagree with you and Perspective about voting for the "hypothetical figurative bicycle thief". (HFBT) Not TFBH. :biggrin:

Let's say you get 15 elected opposition MPs this time, and among them are 5 HFBTs.
The 5 through their speeches, lack of speeches, actions, behaviour, attitude, will give a bad impression of opposition MPs and even detract from the good work and efforts of the other 10. It will also give the pappies and the press a field day, lambesting these 5.
The voters will as usual be negatively impacted and the next time, there may not even be 10 opposition MPs.

All elected opposition MPs need to have some minimum qualities. He can be "worse than" the pap candidate he's contesting against, but he cannot be the worst ever candidate or a HFBT.

Heart Face Black Thick? :biggrin:

The bicycle thief was an analogy derived from a shipyard worker who contested in the 1972 and 1976 election under the WP ticket, who had a record of stealing a bicycle once during his teens. PAP dug that up as an issue despite it being one off. FYI this chap is a businessman today and remains with WP. A cadre, I believe.

Steve Chia also has a juvenile delinquent record which he admitted when he first stood for GE in 1997. Surely he has repented by 1997. I believe you will agree that he did well in Parliament from 2001 to 2006 as NCMP. So what gives?

In reality there will be no candidate fielded by the opposition who are still actively stealing bicycles or women's aprons. I would say that by now, all the opposition candidates fielded by the opposition in 2006 and 2011 meet my minimum criteria - they all have jobs and make a decent honest living. With the importance of getting rid of the dominance, that criteria for the opposition is enough for me.
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
Let be honest, the quality in the opposition pool is sparse.

One must be given credit to the PAP that they managed to ensure that quality candidates do not surface and frankly they have not.

Despite my stand, most Singaporeans will never ever vote HFBT even if there is only one candidate against the PAP. The PAP knows that people generally cannot work out the equation, unable to think out of the box or even attempt to solve the second step of the puzzle. Most people will never ask " how come there is only one candidates or why the quality of candidates is less than good.?"

I can assure you that the People of Potong Pasir did not vote Chiam because he was good, solid or reliable. It was their way to shown discontent. Potong Pasir lost out in grants over 2 decades. You got to give credit to the people of PP for courage and the sacrifice that they have made.



I disagree with you and Perspective about voting for the "hypothetical figurative bicycle thief". (HFBT) Not TFBH. :biggrin:

Let's say you get 15 elected opposition MPs this time, and among them are 5 HFBTs.
The 5 through their speeches, lack of speeches, actions, behaviour, attitude, will give a bad impression of opposition MPs and even detract from the good work and efforts of the other 10. It will also give the pappies and the press a field day, lambesting these 5.
The voters will as usual be negatively impacted and the next time, there may not even be 10 opposition MPs.

All elected opposition MPs need to have some minimum qualities. He can be "worse than" the pap candidate he's contesting against, but he cannot be the worst ever candidate or a HFBT.
 

scroobal

Alfrescian
Loyal
Thanks, you articulated this better than me.
Hahaha...u already knew that there are criteria to qualify to stand for erection. Take it as figuratively speaking lah.
The facts are:

About 30% die hard anti-papee, u put anybody to stand they will vote for opp.
About 40% solid papee supporters, they will always vote for papee.
About 30% swing voters who will decide the outcome.

Scroobal can be die hard anti-papee who will vote for a "bicycle thief", it doesn't mean that the bicycle thief will be elected.
It also doesn't mean that he is irrational.
He is just sending a signal to papee like the other people in this group.

Pse do not argue over the fine print whether it is 30% or 28% etc.
These are just indicative figures.
 
Top