Mainstream media needs to rebuild broken trust, says Viswa Sadasivan

The article below is a report filed by The Online Citizen's Fang Shihan, about NMP Viswa Sadasivan's seminar at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy last week. It was removed following Viswa's request. Viswa had alleged that there were parts in the TOC report that were not adequately contextualised which could result in a skewed reading of what he had said at the LKY School. He said:

"This online article does not capture the tone or spirit of my speech and the question and answer session that followed. It failed to capture the context and the many qualifiers that I had presented that is absolutely necessary for the reader to have, to get an accurate sense of what I conveyed in the speech and my motivation thereof. The online report, intentionally or unwittingly, presented my comments in an exceptionally sharp, even belligerent and self-righteous manner."

My humble opinion is that the readers should decide for themselves:

Mainstream media needs to rebuild broken trust, says Viswa Sadasivan

Friday, 28 August 2009, 5:50 pm

Fang Shihan

“If there’s anyone from the ISD (Internal Security Department) here, you don’t have to identify yourself,” Nominated Member of Parliament, Viswa Sadasivan, told the audience at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy. He was invited as a speaker by the school as part of the Bukit Timah Dialogues programme where students get a chance to interact with Singapore leaders in a series of lunchtime seminars.

Like a tradition, this comic stab at the infamous secret police never fails to make its appearance at various political seminars, as if to ease the tension that persists 2 decades after the ISA (Internal Security Act)[1] was last used against a Singaporean during Operation Spectrum.

Since being lambasted by the MM (Minister Mentor) for having ‘highfalutin’ ideals, Viswa Sadasivan, Nominated Member of Parliament and former senior manager of Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) has been transformed into the darling of the online world. After all, it is not everyday that the ageing MM becomes agitated enough to personally intervene in parliament. [2] Even so, Viswa, an admittedly non-partisan politician, does not appear to relish the limelight, nor does he take a stand against the MM.

Recognizing the tendency for some sections of the internet readership to mercilessly engage in government-bashing, he views his exchange with the MM not with fear, but with a healthy respect that one might give to one’s grandfather.

“I think MM has a different reality. To him, his reality is real. A lot of that belief is predicated on life experiences that were not pleasant. It wasn’t easy for him. A lot of those memories must have come charging at him when he heard or read my speech. I can understand where he was coming from. He is of the firm belief that the ideas I raised are ideological but not necessarily false, but indulgent… If you look at him from that point of view, he makes sense. I disagree with the comments that rubbished his speech. He has as much right as I do, in articulating his thoughts… One should respect him for that.”

As a keen observer of media development over the years, he observes that Singaporeans are increasingly turning to the online space in a bid to find the truth, due to the over-sanitisation of news in the local paper. Ironically, this is where there is less probability of finding the truth. He cautions that because this is an uncurated space, there is not only information, but also misinformation and dis-information – unintentional and intentional dissemination of false information respectively.

The Shincorp-Temasek fiasco as well as the controversial departure of Chip Goodyear from Temasek Holdings were 2 key instances when readership migrated online to quench their thirst for information. Lack of news coverage on critical issues inevitably leads to a surge in speculation. Together with the anonymity that the online space provides, news in the virtual world could be less of a space for truthful information, but rather an outlet avenue to release pent up frustrations or to speculate with conspiracy theories.

Despite this, some sectors online provide an important source of alternative information and are also watchdogs on the government. He observes that pressure put on the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) through the coverage of the Lehmann-Minibonds debacle, by The Online Citizen, led to more accountability to victims of the financial tragedy. Citizen journalists are also not necessarily any less qualified than mainstream journalists, he quips. In fact, as seen from the level of expertise reflected in some online financial and investigative articles, some even put the Straits Times journalists to shame.

However the plight of today’s mainstream media has not always existed.

“When I was there [in Singapore Broadcasting Corporation] in the 1980s, I think we were a bit more gutsy in pushing the boundaries,” he reminisces. “I remember the GE (General Elections) in 1988. We pushed very hard for increased coverage of opposition and on a few occasions we went ahead even though we were told not to. Some of us faced the wrath of a senior political leader at that time. As a journalist if you don’t have bruised knuckles, you are not doing something right. Over the years, because of what I see as depoliticisation of society, you don’t have a crop of people who are interested to become journalists, who are talented to become good journalists. They choose other options, like investment banking.”

Viswa notes that political reporting has declined over the years as journalists themselves have become risk averse and society has been depoliticized. The continued existence of the Internal Security Act (ISA) and the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act [3] has inculcated a culture of political correctness by instilling a certain amount of caution, if not fear among media practitioners in the front line. Yet the lightning speed of information flow today creates an imperative for the local paper to be more concerned with updated information than to be politically correct, as it has been in the past. After all, when information breaks to the international media before the local media, it makes a mockery of the local paper. Viswa cited an instance when he received an SMS about the Nicholl highway collapse, while in Sydney, 20 minutes after the incident. Many Singaporeans then were still unaware of the incident.

Governments today have lost their luxury to hold back information until they are able to hold a press conference, 48 hours after the incident. In today’s world, speed is of crucial importance; the state now has a lot less time to react. If the mainstream media continues losing its credibility, the government could lose the initiative to make sense of what is going on. This loss of authority could lead to increased vulnerability of the nation and even non-traditional security threats.

Trust is eroding between people and the establishment he concludes. There is a mounting cynicism with the mainstream media and thus government is losing its main avenue of communication. Together with the proliferation of misinformation and disinformation online, Viswa worries that the government is increasingly unable to put its point across to the people. The mainstream media needs to rebuild this broken trust, and to be more autonomous, or the problem will exacerbate to a point when there is no U-turn.

Judging by the spirited applause, this man clearly knows his audience. When asked by a student from the public policy school, during the Q&A, if he was trying to be a ‘classic politician’ by invoking the pledge and highlighting income inequality during his speech, he had this to say:

“I did not inject those for effect. I chose information for the speech based on what I have strong convictions on.”

Another student asked about conflicting signals from the government about the new media. He replies with belief that the government is not homogeneous. He believes that some ministers are in touch with the ground while others could be relying on feedback that may not be truthful.

“Those who may be sanitizing the feedback [to the ministers] are doing a gross injustice. Many [ministers] are good people with good intentions who want to do good for this country… we shouldn’t begrudge that.” He adds that there is increasing debate within the leadership and more efforts to influence through the new media."

MPs hamtum Low TK!

Wah Budget debate machiam gladiator movie. LTK kena walloped left right centre. But LTK's point very simple what -

Mr Low: Our position is that we will never cut the CPF. But the question is, must it be Jobs Credit? Could it be other forms to help employers to cut costs? There may be other forms. But to me, Jobs Credit as it is, I don't think it's effective.

But those PAP MPs instead of questioning whether or not Jobs Credit Scheme is useful or effective, they use this opportunity to attack LTK. They all like dun understand LTK's very simple point, keep repeating their blurness, waste time, and in the end, ask like never been asked. 

In the end, is Singaporeans lose out. We choose MPs to represent the people, speak for the people. Yet rather than asking if these gahmen schemes are effective or not they unnecessarily go and grill LTK. I feel like I'm repeating myself. That's my point la, instead of making their points, they waste time repeating themselves. I'm repeating again. Dohz...

That Straits Times Chua Mui Hoong also one kind. Bootlick the PAP then bootlick la, why must sneak in an attack on LTK -

Mr Low's reply - English not being his most comfortable language - was a bit muddled: 'If the Workers' Party is in government, I'd rather that we use the money - if there's a need to save employers' cost - to pay directly to the CPF account of the members, for those who are in difficulty, for companies which are in difficulty, rather than have a Jobs Credit scheme that gives companies, regardless (of) whether they are profitable.

LTK's Engrish skills has no relevance here, no need to psycho Singaporean readers. If his statements are muddled, does that mean your quotation of him cannot be trusted? 

But after seeing LTK's performance on Youtube, I think LTK did very well. His English is not his first language, but he made himself understood what. Or is it that Chua Mui Hoong don't understand the Singlish accent? Maybe Chua Mui Hoong should interview LTK in Teochew la. 

Anyway, one man facing a load of PAP MPs is not easy, especially when they are not there to interrogate the issue but to pin down one man. At the end of the day, are we Singaporeans any better-off in knowing whether Jobs Credit scheme is good? So, like what LTK asked - what if it is not good? How lidatt? 

Now gahmen say use reserves, the reserves so fast can open. If Opposition form gahmen I wonder how many man years it will take before the money can come out of the reserves. And just because the gahmen say can use reserves, all the MPs clap their hands say good move. If gahmen happen to take the other tack and refuse to use reserves, I suppose these same MPs will also say good move la. Sometimes I wonder why we have all these MPs and pay them so much. Machiam redundant lidatt.

P65

I see from P65 blog, Lam Pin Min say why newspapers everyday bad news. Interesting question. Maybe news are really very bad and newspapers report as it is. Or maybe gahmen got agenda and newspapers obediently report gahmen's agenda. I mean not that obviously and directly la. Or maybe Lam Pin Min by making that statement has his own agenda? mmmmmm.

Anyway, it's good that he makes the effort to blog and talk to netizens. But I do wish that he would be more critical in engaging with gahmen policies. I mean, obviously he must toe party line and support the gahmen. But that doesn't mean he has to simply repeat what the gahmen already say. His replies just seem a bit 'off', somewhat lacking in sincerity. I prefer Baey Yam Keng, although is PAP guy, he seems more earnest. All the other hip hop MPs disappear liaoz.. maybe they have nothing else to say.

Sometimes I wish I were in a real dictatorship rather than be in a pretend one that is neither here nor there. At least then we can spend our time and energy living our lives than to be stuck on this aimless merry go round.

MSM name calling

How come these days the gahmen and the MSM like to call names? First (ok not really the first) we got Charles Chong calling us lesser mortals. Then Eugene Wee the tabloid writer calls bloggers bacteria. 

And then now Straits Times must join in. The two brave nudists are called insects. Like that how to be gracious society. Not even that, what kind of society are we that has MPs thinking the people it represents as lesser mortals? 

Straits Times is also not some upright institution what. At most it reports things as things are. But that is not very often. Mostly it reports things so that the gahmen will look good. I don't really want to join in the name-calling and call them prostitutes and lapdogs and shitty times and toilet paper and what not la. But for an immoral bootlicker newspaper to sit on some moral horse and call other people insects is a bit rich. 

If I call pest control to go fumigate the SPH newsroom you think how many rats and cockroaches will crawl out? 

Feb 1, 2009

ST EDITORIAL

That naked stunt

... Just as there were those who cheered them on, there were others who were discomfited or offended by the stunt. There must be a sense of decorum in any society which sets its own threshold of social tolerance. One could say aberrations are to be expected with the influx of all sorts of foreigners, who bring with them their social mores and strange habits. Resident foreigners largely respect local sensibilities. The Holland V performers were the odd insects to have flown in through the open window.