Philip Jeyaretnam clarifies mis-reporting by Straits Times
-
Written by Our Correspondent
Senior Counsel Mr Philip Jeyaretnam had written to the Straits Times Forum to clarify a mis-reporting in an interview published yesterday under the “Insight” column.
Mr Philip Jeyaretnam is the younger son of the late opposition leader J.B. Jeyaretnam who was at one time a one-man fighting machine against the PAP juggernaut. His elder brother Kenneth Jeyaretnam is the Secretary-General of the Reform Party founded by their father last year.
The lengthy interview, conducted by Straits Times Senior Correspondent Sue-Ann Chia was supposedly on Philip’s thoughts about his recent appointment to the Public Service Commission (PSC), but turned out to be about his father and brother.
Sue-Ann Chia portrayed Philip as having reservations about his brother entering politics and taking over the Reform Party in her article in the paragraph below:
“After all, his elder brother Kenneth took over the reins from his father and is now heading the Reform Party.
Asked how he feels about this, he pauses and seems to struggle for an answer.
‘We have always respected each other’s choices in life and we have made slightly different choices,’ he says.”
[Source: Straits Times Insight, 4 November 2009]
According to Mr Philip Jeyaretnam, his exact words were omitted from the interview:
“Unfortunately, what I said about my brother, Kenneth, in answer to the question on what I thought about his taking over the leadership of the Reform Party, was omitted.
I told the interviewer that Kenneth has ‘embarked on a serious project, and I am sure he will do a good job, knowing his capability’.”
[Source: Straits Times Forum, 5 November 2009]
As we can see from the above, there is a wide gulf in the meaning between the two passages which would have generated contrasting perceptions in the readers.
Mr Philip Jeyaretnam had stated explicitly in no uncertain terms that he supported his brother’s political endeavors fully and he is confident that he will do a good job instead of the ambiguous stance reported initially in the interview.
He must be surprised that the interview turned out to be quite different from what he thought about when he was first approached for it by Straits Times:
“It is a pity that an interview about my appointment to the Public Service Commission, subsequently billed as being about my father and brother, omitted my actual response, and jumped to the very different subject of choices in life.”
It is a common tactic employed by SPH journalists to deliberately omit, distort and twist the words of their interviewees to create a desired impression in the minds of the unsuspecting readers in order to pursue the agenda of their political masters.
(In all the interviews conducted by the Temasek Review, we always publish the interviewee’s words as they actually are without any editing. Whenever we make any changes which may change the impression and perception of the content, we will email the interviewee the draft and seek his/her approval first before publishing the interview)
In this case, it is obvious that the article is trying to play up a non-existent division between the two brothers by highlighting Philip’s ambivalence towards Kenneth’s foray into politics.
Actually Philip shouldn’t be surprised as this is not the first time that the Straits Times has deliberately twisted and distorted the picture of his family.
The Straits Times often demonized his father J.B. Jeyaretnam as a “radical” and “dangerous” “maniac” out to subvert the PAP’s political system during his frequent altercations with Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew in the 1980s.
When J.B. Jeyaretnam passed away last year, there was a complete media blackout on his political career, his funeral and the candle-light vigil held in remembrance of him at Hong Lim Park by a group of young Singaporeans.
Soon after Kenneth Jeyaretnam announced his decision to enter politics, the Straits Times again tried to paint him as a “foreigner” who spent a large number of years away in Singapore.
The opposition leaders as well as bloggers must think twice before agreeing to interviews by SPH journalists next time. They will not give you free publicity for nothing.
With the new media emerging as an alternative to the mainstream media, there is no need to rely on the latter anymore to get one’s message across.
-
Singapore would have been a far more vibrant country, if only the echoes from the past did not fall into bitter silence in The House at Oxley Road since 9 August 1965...
"But we either believe in democracy or we not. If we do, then, we must say categorically, without qualification, that no restraint from the any democratic processes, other than by the ordinary law of the land, should be allowed... If you believe in democracy, you must believe in it unconditionally. If you believe that men should be free, then, they should have the right of free association, of free speech, of free publication. Then, no law should permit those democratic processes to be set at nought, and no excuse, whether of security, should allow a government to be deterred from doing what it knows to right, and what it must know to be right... "
- Lee Kuan Yew, Legislative Assembly Debates April 27, 1955
-
I think Lee Kuan Yew has gone too far in his political repression.
-
Hey, where's the law minister? Just recently he was going around complaining about the low Press Freedom Index that they got. Where is he now? There's one nice piece of evidence for his further reading here.
I've always wondered why did we accept being called the alternative media.
When enough young people abandon the story-churning newspapers for reliable accounts of Singapore news online, the new media IS the mainstream media.
As for the current newspapers, their standards do not even match up to be an "alternative". They are at best suitable for mindless Singaporeans who accept "stories" at face value and declare them to be true.
As the years go by, we shall see a shift from the nonsenencial and propagandistic news to a reliable, valid and independent source of news online.
There was never any explanation for the rise in Press Freedom from 144th to 133rd. I suspect websites like TheOnlineCitizen, TemasekReview or the SingaporeNewsAlternative are the main reasons for the rise.
The current standards of journalism has been dropping over the years and its impossible for the Press Freedom to rise because of that.
I look foward to the day whereby Singaporeans treat newspapers as nothing more than a tool to wrap your vegetables and fruits with. Or maybe for fast food restaurants to clean their windows with.
-
Singapore must have press media, not state media.
Why Singapore can't have a free media?
Why?
Why must all the media be controlled by PAP govt?
Spread their fucking propaganda filth?
Why?
-
“It is a pity that an interview about my appointment to the Public Service Commission, subsequently billed as being about my father and brother, omitted my actual response, and jumped to the very different subject of choices in life.”
This is a very sad state of affair here in sg.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Singapore would have been a far more vibrant country, if only the echoes from the past did not fall into bitter silence in The House at Oxley Road since 9 August 1965...
"But we either believe in democracy or we not. If we do, then, we must say categorically, without qualification, that no restraint from the any democratic processes, other than by the ordinary law of the land, should be allowed... If you believe in democracy, you must believe in it unconditionally. If you believe that men should be free, then, they should have the right of free association, of free speech, of free publication. Then, no law should permit those democratic processes to be set at nought, and no excuse, whether of security, should allow a government to be deterred from doing what it knows to right, and what it must know to be right... "
- Lee Kuan Yew, Legislative Assembly Debates April 27, 1955
I believe a more proper choice of words is that we might have become a more vibrant country.Or we might have been relegated to a political/economical position weaker than we are now.
If your argument is that Singapore would have surely undergo a golden age but that it is the mutation that is LKY that stunted that growth, i'm not buying that view. It's just too simple an answer and only possible with hindsight.
For all intents and purposes, we're not going to turn back the clock. I fail to see the reasoning for trying to insist that we could have been better off if LKY didn't exist.
I would think Singaporean voters would be more interested in what we should be heading towards, then reminiscing about what could have happened.
-
Originally posted by Stevenson101:
I believe a more proper choice of words is that we might have become a more vibrant country.
I don't think that is correct. Before 1959, Singapore was politically and culturally vibrant.
I think we have to bring in Chew Bakar to confirm this.
Chew Bakar, this is your call.
-
....
-
Originally posted by Stevenson101:
I believe a more proper choice of words is that we might have become a more vibrant country.Or we might have been relegated to a political/economical position weaker than we are now.
If your argument is that Singapore would have surely undergo a golden age but that it is the mutation that is LKY that stunted that growth, i'm not buying that view. It's just too simple an answer and only possible with hindsight.
For all intents and purposes, we're not going to turn back the clock. I fail to see the reasoning for trying to insist that we could have been better off if LKY didn't exist.
I would think Singaporean voters would be more interested in what we should be heading towards, then reminiscing about what could have happened.
The answer lies in this single paragraph that you have made -" If your argument is that Singapore would have surely undergo a golden age but that it is the mutation that is LKY that stunted that growth, i'm not buying that view. It's just too simple an answer and only possible with hindsight. "
Firstly, given the situation that Singapore is what it is today - is due largely to the deliberate authoritarian rulings - over the last 52 years - by a Stalinist-Autocrat, who had 'mutated' a pseudo-Capitalist system with the best features of Communist State command economy with monopolistic controls to tweak market forces to benefit the politcal and economic goals of the State.
For 52 years, the brain drain have been bleeding the best from Singapore, would it not serve Singapore if the cause for the brain drain had been surgically removed ?
Secondly, the answer cannot be simpler as it is, why do you need it to be more complex to have it become more palatable ?
Thirdly, if after half-a-century of monotonous rule, we have no ability to review with some degree of 'hindsight' - surely you will not want to be politely accused to be suffering from "myopia", or at worst to be insulted to be lacking in "intelligence" ?
The difference between your ‘might have been’ (*1) - which means that "an event that could have occurred but never did" - (period ??); and my ‘would have been’ (*2) is that my phrase refer to events in the past perfect tense with the future in perspective.
It simply meant to review the past and considering all the events that had occurred and if it had been corrected - the future can be differently better with a hope, when one considers that despite the present cancer there already exist a stunted growth.
Then 'would have been' remains correct as stated.
-
With the new media emerging as an alternative to the mainstream media, there is no need to rely on the latter anymore to get one’s message across.
there is no denying that there exists media slant in almost everywhere, even in so called freedom-champion places like the west, like eg their coverage of middle east conflict biased towards one side's story. It is just so farcical, going by what lofty standards the world holds them by.
similarly, the views and selective reporting by temasek review and several others of the local political arena are clear for all to see, that is propagandizing towards the cause of inciting opposition against the democratically voted in government. Let us not deny this and kid ourselves due to sheer bias which allow our minds to be skewed.
at least kudos to the straits times to come forth and print out immediately the next day the mistake / "mistake" which it has made although they may not do so, an act which i dont see the alternative media like temasek review complimentary acknowledging! But instead, it went on to let us in on a lesson and crowing on how it distinguishes itself on reporting an interview.
isn't the alternative media like temasek review not guilty of the same charge which it has unshamefully quick to accuse others of then? what a joke!
-
Originally posted by Bentsb05:
With the new media emerging as an alternative to the mainstream media, there is no need to rely on the latter anymore to get one’s message across.
there is no denying that there exists media slant in almost everywhere, even in so called freedom-champion places like the west, like eg their coverage of middle east conflict biased towards one side's story. It is just so farcical, going by what lofty standards the world holds them by.
similarly, the views and selective reporting by temasek review and several others of the local political arena are clear for all to see, that is propagandizing towards the cause of inciting opposition against the democratically voted in government. Let us not deny this and kid ourselves due to sheer bias which allow our minds to be skewed.
at least kudos to the straits times to come forth and print out immediately the next day the mistake / "mistake" which it has made although they may not do so, an act which i dont see the alternative media like temasek review complimentary acknowledging! But instead, it went on to let us in on a lesson and crowing on how it distinguishes itself on reporting an interview.
isn't the alternative media like temasek review not guilty of the same charge which it has unshamefully quick to accuse others of then? what a joke!
Thank the Lord for sgForums, Temasek Review, TheOnlineCitizen and many others for the allternative news / views / articles / reporting.Without them, you will never get an apology / admission / retraction for false, misleading and bias reporting by The Straits Times.
May sgForums, Temasek Review, TheOnlineCitizen and the others grow and prosper in the coming years.
-
As a learned man, I am surprised that Philip gave an interview to ST. He should know ST's stand with the govt. ST is not alone, all other mass media in SG do so for fear of crossing the OB markers.
-
PJ should know who controls the local media by now.
They are never for the oppositions. Professionalism is absent from the local press where this sort of matter is concerned. Local media is a tool for propaganda.
-
Well, he has the right to remain silent or refuse the interview, he should known the media well, they are not interested in his position, that wouldn't bring much news and front page sensational in the media, his brother and late father is the ultimate news the reporters wanted, he should be careful. Just Shut up
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
Well, he has the right to remain silent or refuse the interview, he should known the media well, they are not interested in his position, that wouldn't bring much news and front page sensational in the media, his brother and late father is the ultimate news the reporters wanted, he should be careful. Just Shut up
The Taiwanese 'hum' could have taken a piece of its imbecilic wisdom and remain silent or refuse itself to broadcast its ignorance with its daily insistence to publish its flippantly irrelevant and irrerevant replies in this Speaker's Corner.Is anyone 'interested in its position that wouldn't bring much new thoughts even as it attempt to hit the front page in some sensational ways' ?
If only the "Attention Seeking Whore" inside the Taiwanese 'hum' will learn to 'be careful' and take its own imbecilic advise and "Just SHUT UP".
-
What kind of pariah journalism is this? Don't say it is another honest mistake!
-
even if it is another honest mistake, we all also diam diam, and most likely you guys will be posting here again
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
even if it is another honest mistake, we all also diam diam, and most likely you guys will be posting here again
You are at your best when you talk with your clitoris as your tongue that wag uselessly in a 'hum' that serve as your mouth - all displayed to simply get your daily orgasmic fix as an "Attention Seeking Whore".Is it any surprise that the irrelevant stuff secreted in your Taiwanese 'hum' will flow so freely as you arouse yourself with your self-consuming vanity to attract attention ?
Try douching your Taiwanese 'hum' to clear your brain if you cannot learn to take your own advise to simply "SHUT UP" when you have nothing to say.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
even if it is another honest mistake, we all also diam diam, and most likely you guys will be posting here again
Who is your 'WE' it's just you in here who is blind,dumb and crazy>hahaha -
Originally posted by angel7030:
Well, he has the right to remain silent or refuse the interview, he should known the media well, they are not interested in his position, that wouldn't bring much news and front page sensational in the media, his brother and late father is the ultimate news the reporters wanted, he should be careful. Just Shut up
Philip J is no stranger to politics. For years since young he had been trailing his father during elections. He, an educated man, should have known how the local media works. There is no conspiracy with the local media except to present the news as best as the reporter saw fit, to fit his/her subject point, which is the oddity that a son from the opposition camp would be holding a critical position within the civil service managed and administered by the current voted ruling party.
It is no more than a curiousity that the reporter thought would be of an interest to readers, and thus the focus was on this famous son, on his thoughts and not about his father or his up and comming politician brother.
He had the right to deny such interviews, not to speak to the ST reporter, which he didnt excercise, and not the fault of the media, and could have use other media to bring his subjective points across.
That he would sought to clarify the reporter's disinterest or out of topic subjects, and demanded for the reporter to say what he wishes to put across is an authoritarian request, which even the newspaper graciously allowed.
Such an attitude is not lost on the general public, whom are not blind or crazy, whom are rational, but of course, there will be some who had been blinded by hatred for the ruling party, the media, etc to go crazy.
Worse still, will be some wild ones who by their numerous insane repetitive posts here and other threads, would make use Angel7030's post which reminded Philip J his right, but twisted to be something else to deny Angel7030 of her right to speak up here, an annonymous free site .
.
-
The resident X-rated Fraud never fail to provide light entertainment with its repeated debacle in uselessly attempting to white-wash the worn out image of its Master's Tail with its pseudo-intellect.
Originally posted by xtreyier:Philip J is no stranger to politics. For years since young he had been trailing his father during elections. He, an educated man, should have known how the local media works. There is no conspiracy with the local media except to present the news as best as the reporter saw fit, to fit his/her subject point, which is the oddity that a son from the opposition camp would be holding a critical position within the civil service managed and administered by the current voted ruling party.
Can the media itself, or the lower ranked reporters be capable of any conspiracy - when the higher ranked management is staffed by PAP political appointees ?
If only the X-rated Fraud had paid attention to its history lessons, it would have known that the act of its "Master's Tail in wagging the dog" - cannot be an oddity.
Is this the first time that such an event had occurred to make it an oddity ?
Even LKY had appointed the late David Marshall to be the Singapore Ambassador to France, despite the late David Marshall being LKY's erstwhile political debater - with a keen mind that rivalled and competed with LKY.
GCT had even extended a helping hand to both Kenneth and Philip Jeyaretnam - when many Singapore and Foreign Employers were reluctant to employ them for fear of political fallout from LKY and his PAP - as both wer JBJ's sons.
Such are the petty politics that can only exist in Third World Countries, and when the innocent individuals are used for their talent - with political mileage being extracted to polish the image of the PAP.
Is there any oddity to such an event ?
It is no more than a curiousity that the reporter thought would be of an interest to readers, and thus the focus was on this famous son, on his thoughts and not about his father or his up and comming politician brother.
It is not a surprise that the X-rated Fraud - who has repeatedly claim itself to be "an insignificant nobody" - will be so immodest as to venture confidently that "It is no more than a curiousity that the reporter thought would be of an interest to readers".
How did the X-rated Fraud come to such a position ?
Was it entirely due to the thinking capabilities of an "insignificant nobody" with obvious habit at being a pseudo-intellect ?
Or has it access to some privileged information that it will not venture to divulge, but will promote this "naked attempt at a repair job" - even when there is another thread that put right what had been deliberately done wrong - as had been featured in this Thread ?
He had the right to deny such interviews, not to speak to the ST reporter, which he didnt excercise, and not the fault of the media, and could have use other media to bring his subjective points across.
Is the X-rated Fraud attempting to make it the fault of Philip Jeyaretnam - in agreeing to give the ST reporter an opportunity to interview him; and it is not the fault of the ST reporter for skewing the interview with a hidden political agenda that needed Philip Jeyaretanm to demand clarification to be published ?
That he would sought to clarify the reporter's disinterest or out of topic subjects, and demanded for the reporter to say what he wishes to put across is an authoritarian request, which even the newspaper graciously allowed.
What possibly could the resident X-rated pseudo-intellect intend to mean with its dubious words in the "authoritarian request" ?
Was it due to the newspaper behaving "graciously" to allow a correction to be made, or was it due to the status of Philip Jeyaretnam ?
Had it been any other "insignificant nobody" as an ordinary Singapore Citizen - it is doubtful even the X-rated Fraud or anyone will get the same width of respect that had been given to Philip Jeyaretnam for the corrections made.
Such an attitude is not lost on the general public, whom are not blind or crazy, whom are rational, but of course, there will be some who had been blinded by hatred for the ruling party, the media, etc to go crazy.
It is a surprise that for one that is not blind or crazy, it pseudo-intellect has to pre-empt any possibility of having itself being debunked - as displayed in such churlish attempt.
The ordinary citizens - who are not blind or crazy - will be wondering what possibly can the resident X-rated Fraud intend to mean, with such a defensive posture - when it is already reputed for its pseudo-intellect and immense skills at deceit, dishonesty and duplicity.
Has the X-rated Fraud again Double-XX itself in its hurried rush to justify its position, when it knows that it is untenable ?
Worse still, will be some wild ones who by their numerous insane repetitive posts here and other threads, would make use Angel7030's post which reminded Philip J his right, but twisted to be something else to deny Angel7030 of her right to speak up here, an annonymous free site .
The disingenious abilities of the X-rated Fraud seems to be unlimited, and begins with its reading abilities, to its writing skills, and further beyond into its deluded glory.
It is not pathetic for the X-rated Fraud to be unable to note that the Taiwanese 'hum' - that it sees as an angel with a capital 'A' - had a totally different view from its own fraudelent interpretation of the reporter's intentions.
While the X-rated Fraud read the post as "no more than a curiousity that the reporter thought would be of an interest to readers, and thus the focus was on this famous son, on his thoughts and not about his father or his up and comming politician brother "
- its 'angelic' Taiwanese 'hum' had intepreted it as - "not interested in his position, that wouldn't bring much news and front page sensational in the media, his brother and late father is the ultimate news the reporters wanted".
For a X-rated Fraud that can skew the meaning of its besotted angel with a capital 'A' - can it be depended to interprete what its angel intended with its deluded mind ?
If only the X-rated Fraud with its insufferable pseudo-intellect will take the advise of its 'angel' with a capital 'A' - to simply 'SHUT UP' if it has nothing to say.
Originally posted by angel7030:Well, he has the right to remain silent or refuse the interview, he should known the media well, they are not interested in his position, that wouldn't bring much news and front page sensational in the media, his brother and late father is the ultimate news the reporters wanted, he should be careful. Just Shut up
-
Originally posted by Short Ninja:
Who is your 'WE' it's just you in here who is blind,dumb and crazy>hahahaThen what you want to do with a honest mistake...kill them?
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
Then what you want to do with a honest mistake...kill them?
Did you give your clitoris a rest, and now returning for your daily second orgasmic show of the Day - before romping on the streets in Geylang, Joo Chiat, Desker, Petain and Keong Siak ?An "Attention Seeking Whore" will surely know how to kill any honesty - and more so with a wagging clitoris that uselessly hangout from its Taiwanese 'hum' simply to get its orgasmic shot twice a day.
-
Originally posted by Short Ninja:
What kind of pariah journalism is this? Don't say it is another honest mistake!
Journalism in sg is tightly controlled to suit one's agenda.