Press Secretary of MICA response to Mr Brown article
-
The Press Secretary critisied Mr Brown for his article "S'poreans are fed, up with progress!" that appeared on last Friday's TODAY. If you missed his article, here is the link:
http://www.todayonline.com/articles/127762.asp
MICA's Letter (in full)
Press Secretary to the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts
Jul 3, 2006.
"Your mr brown column, "S'poreans are fed, up with progress!" (June 30) poured sarcasm on many issues, including the recent General Household Survey, price increases in electricity tariffs and taxi fares, our IT plans, the Progress Package and means testing for special school fees.
The results of the General Household Survey were only available after the General Election. But similar data from the Household Expenditure Survey had been published last year before the election.
There was no reason to suppress the information. It confirmed what we had told Singaporeans all along, that globalisation would stretch out incomes.
mr brown must also know that price increases in electricity tariffs and taxi fares are the inevitable result of higher oil prices.
These were precisely the reasons for the Progress Package - to help
lower income Singaporeans cope with higher costs of living.
Our IT plans are critical to Singapore's competitive position and will improve the job chances of individual Singaporeans. It is wrong of mr brown to make light of them.
As for means testing for special school fees, we understand mr brown's disappointment as the father of an autistic child. However, with means testing, we can devote more resources to families who need more help.
mr brown's views on all these issues distort the truth. They are
polemics dressed up as analysis, blaming the Government for all that he is unhappy with. He offers no alternatives or solutions. His piece is calculated to encourage cynicism and despondency, which can only make things worse, not better, for those he professes to sympathise with.
mr brown is entitled to his views. But opinions which are widely
circulated in a regular column in a serious newspaper should meet
higher standards. Instead of a diatribe mr brown should offer
constructive criticism and alternatives. And he should come out from behind his pseudonym to defend his views openly.
It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to
champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government. If a
columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while
exploiting his access to the mass media to undermine the Government's standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics." -
if filling nearly the entire paper with pro-pap and pro-government content is "neutral" to them then truly neutral newspapers must be anarchy
-
if they bother to write and publish an explanation, it means they inside the heart got ghost
-
Do i see a lawsuit coming?
-
Mr Brown is going to have to learn from Mr Francis Seow soon. I see the abolishment of blogs come october 2007.
-
Ah yes, the good old PAP smear. Where would we be without it?
-
In fact, I am glad that MICA had spoken up and rectified the distorted truth to the public.Originally posted by FireIce:if they bother to write and publish an explanation, it means they inside the heart got ghost
'The tolerance of evil will only breed greater evil.'
-
can't believe the gabrament did that
mr brown has always been looking at things with a bit of caustic wit...
looks like the gabrament put both its feet in its mouth so far, it's up to the knees
the more they rant on against mr brown, the more truth is in the articles of mr brown..
i guess them being inbred idiots cloistered in ivory towers, we can't blame their blindness -
Well, Bear, you know as well as anybody how them folks take themselves way too seriously, never realising that it's always someone else's job.
-
Are we allowed to give feedback only if we have the solution? If that's the case, why are we paying ministers & perm sec high salaries? Ain't they suppose to solve problems at the national level?
Next, if newspaper dont champion issues then why do we need newspaper?
As it is, our newspapers have low standing among Singaporeans. If they are openly reminded to carry only good news, then even fewer people will believe them.
Anyway, here is one article by a Malaysian journalist on this issue:
Role of journalists
If what this government letter says represents policy, Singapore's future is bleak. By Seah Chiang Nee.
Jul 3, 2006
Singapore's survival depends on the collective wisdom and superior logic of its entire people - and that must include its controlled newspapers and journalists.
Its future depends on everyone's contribution.
I have just read a letter issued by Ms. K. Bhavani, Press Secretary to the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts, which concludes that: "It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government" I find it disturbing enough to comment.
If this is indeed not government policy in 21st Century Singapore and just an unintended bureaucratic observation, I hope it will be corrected.
Mr. Bhavani's letter was commenting on an article by well-liked Singaporean blogger, Mr. Brown "S'poreans are fed, up with progress!" (June 30)"
I do not wish to comment on the merits or demerits of either side; readers will probably form their own opinions. But when the Press Secretary said:
(1) "It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues.." This cannot be further from the truth.
They have thankfully been championing the fight against a whole range of society's ills such as drugs, alcoholism, crime, HIV-AIDS, etc, etc and I hope they will continue to do so.
If you take this role away, the media might as well close. What Ms. Bhavani probably means is 'political' or closer still "opposition" issues. If so, he should say so.
(2) "It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to ... campaign for or against the Government." How many times have The Straits Times or Channel News Asia or any of the mainstream media been publicly or privately blamed for 'campaigning FOR the government.? Not in a million moons! So why say it.
But Ms. Bhavani's action is not all bad as far as I am concerned. It is a rare, if not first, official comment by the government on a blogger's writing - even if it is a criticism.
Until now, the government has ignored what the Internet has to say, preferring to treat it with suspicion and hostility. I hope Mr. Bhavani and other ministries will continue to engage the new media, agree or disagree.
The blogosphere has its share of crazies (definitely not Mr. Brown whom I admire) but also sound, rational writers and good analyses of today's changing Singapore. - -
It would appear Mr Brown's article, however sarcastic, drove home some 'truths' on the issue of surveys, which MICA felt had to be clarified to the fullest so Singaporeans would not be 'misled'.
Typical and deepseated Government mindset.
Yet the overly hostile approach taken to put Mr Brown 'in his place' is strangely surprising, considering that Mr Brown was the darling of the blogosphere not too long ago, especially over the wit of their Mee Pok Man non-political podcast. Even govt ministers acknowledged the humour of it.
However, it seems when it comes to issues that question the validity of govt sanctioned surveys, it touches a fine line on the lighter side of credibility, a non-debateble issue in govt circles. Our govt will not tolerate even the slightest suggestion that their credibility is questionable, hence the harsh and 'robust' response.
This is reminiscient of the case where two NTU NBS professors got lambasted by the MOM for criticizing their 'slanted' figures over employment statistics not too long ago. The NTU professors, as i recall, stood by their arguments despite calls from the govt to 'moderate' their stand, for to do so would be an open indication that their claims 'were wrong'.
Our govt has to eventually learn how to tackle and address the question of issues floating on the internet sooner or later, and in a amicable manner; more of these virulent attacks are certainly both unwelcome and unhelpful. -
Oh, and after reading Mr Brown's article, i was, as netizens like to type, roll on floor laughing (rofl)....
The unmistakable dry humour and seamless jokes were perpetually funny and surprising catchy, especially when Singaporean lifestyle is taken into account.
MICA's response is sadly, of poor taste and spins the same rhetoric as always: specifically pointing out that the article offered 'no solutions' and influence more Singaporeans to be 'cynical and despondent', as if it were Singaporeans' own fault that we are in this current predicament. Even MICA's suppose sympathy for Mr Brown's autistic child was clearly insincere.
Actually, after all the talk about us failing to provide solutions to problems and simply ranting complaint after complaint against the govt, i am now well-poised and expecting some creative solutions from our govt for our non-stop rising costs.
Well? Any takers? All they can hint at is still MORE rising costs to our living. No wait, the correct word is 'revised' costs, isn't it? I admit it has a nice ring to it.
During NS, we were taught that in fighting a war, there are no bad soldiers, only bad leaders. Our ministers and high profile govt agency personnel might need one of those lessons right now, seeing as how they famously blame the masses for their mistakes. -
Latest news. TODAY had suspended Mr Brown column..
http://www.mrbrown.com/blog/2006/07/regarding_today.html -
Yeah, it's good that they have responded to the article. This will give us both sides of the story to ponder upon, instead of the one sided story from brown. However, just because they have responded with their views, we shouldn't take for granted what they wrote to be the whole truth, just as we shouldn't with what brown has wrote, but it's good to have more knowledge on the issues now for us to think and judge than previously we had.Originally posted by TooFree:In fact, I am glad that MICA had spoken up and rectified the distorted truth to the public.
'The tolerance of evil will only breed greater evil.' -
ok, lesson learnt, let's move on!
Let's try and predict when Mr Brown's blog will be shut down, and be investigated. -
well .... if you guys will hold the cynicism for a bit, the very fact that such a column appeared in a national publication, seems to show that a certain modicum of journalistic independence in Singapore .... at the very least, perhaps it shows that some editors are not completely somebody's lap doggie .....
so, I think it bodes well for the future ......
-
Imagine my suprise. This incident puts the government in a pretty bad light.Originally posted by 84mmrr:Latest news. TODAY had suspended Mr Brown column..
http://www.mrbrown.com/blog/2006/07/regarding_today.html -
This clearly implies that anyone may provide FEEDBACK, but must not CRITICISE.
However, how often (if ever) were FEEDBACKS heeded??
Perhaps, they will have to hold and stand firm on their policies until cirucmstances prove that those policies must change just like aloowing CASINOS here???
That's they way it is - nothing but U-turns.... -
self censorship is the most effective form of censorship ....Originally posted by av98m:Imagine my suprise. This incident puts the government in a pretty bad light.
but hey, at least you know someone in there had a pair of balls before .... -
Kinda expected. Looks obvious to be under government pressure. We have to put ourselves in the shoes of the people or editor who took off the article though, they did what they did or else they may lose their job (and then someone else will still take off the article anyway), the instructions could well come from higher grounds. I doubt there will be little righteous enough people who will stand firm and strongly by their beliefs, which is why opposition parties are much better respected than PAP people.Originally posted by 84mmrr:Latest news. TODAY had suspended Mr Brown column..
http://www.mrbrown.com/blog/2006/07/regarding_today.html -
well ... i agree to a certain extent on the feedbacks you speak of ...Originally posted by ShutterBug:This clearly implies that anyone may provide FEEDBACK, but must not CRITICISE.
However, how often (if ever) were FEEDBACKS heeded??
Perhaps, they will have to hold and stand firm on their policies until cirucmstances prove that those policies must change just like aloowing CASINOS here???
That's they way it is - nothing but U-turns....
but I rather have a goverment who's not afraid of U-turns and would change with the circumstances, than one who's obdurate and stubborn .... -
and now we need more of those brass ones.Originally posted by Fatum:self censorship is the most effective form of censorship ....
but hey, at least you know someone in there had a pair of balls before .... 
-
Yet another set-back by our supposed push forward into the communication age.Originally posted by 84mmrr:Latest news. TODAY had suspended Mr Brown column..
http://www.mrbrown.com/blog/2006/07/regarding_today.html
Our govt has chosen to stifle free speech, and now HUMOUR?!?
It's also disappointing that TODAY has caved in due to political pressure to censure Mr Brown. In the first place, having edited the daring article prior to publishing, they should have known the implications and ramifications should govt agencies like MICA take issue with it.
If that were the case, they should have declined to publish it at all.
The fact that they exercised the alternative option indicates that the editor saw NOTHING WRONG with the column.
For them to produce such a dramatic U-turn is sadly spineless and smacks of editorial gerrymandering. Our journalistic world is poorer for it, as is our nation. -
Just wanted to highlight a comment made in Mr Brown's Blog in response to closure:
Didnt an editor approve what mr brown wrote? Aren't there many more layers of people above supervising the content of the newspaper? Why is it that with the first sign of trouble- they hang the lowly writer out to dry? THIS IS THE CHARACTER OF THE PEOPLE WHO WORK IN THE NEWS HERE. No conscience. They dont stand by what their paper has published. They BETRAY their fellow industry colleagues. NOT A SINGLE JOURNALIST, EDITOR or ANYONE HAS SAID ANYTHING IN THE LOCAL PRESS, RADIO OR TV. THIS GETS ME MAD.
There are many people here in the forum who appreciate brown and the freedom of speech. Looks like NOBODY in TODAY, ST, MEDIACORP has ANY opinion on MICA's letter and Brown's article.
mr brown- you have my support. TODAY-i'm never picking it up again and i'm emailing all my friends.
Posted by: mentalman | Jul 6, 2006 8:52:26 AM
The first paragraph basically says it all.
At least that reporter in the USA who was thrown in jail stood by her conscience and refused to divulge her sources, even when the judge threw her in jail for contempt of court to let her 'think it through'.
Here our editors's hum ji attitude sickens me. What cowardice! -
c'mon, give the editor some credit .....Originally posted by BillyBong:Just wanted to highlight a comment made in Mr Brown's Blog in response to closure:
Didnt an editor approve what mr brown wrote? Aren't there many more layers of people above supervising the content of the newspaper? Why is it that with the first sign of trouble- they hang the lowly writer out to dry? THIS IS THE CHARACTER OF THE PEOPLE WHO WORK IN THE NEWS HERE. No conscience. They dont stand by what their paper has published. They BETRAY their fellow industry colleagues. NOT A SINGLE JOURNALIST, EDITOR or ANYONE HAS SAID ANYTHING IN THE LOCAL PRESS, RADIO OR TV. THIS GETS ME MAD.
There are many people here in the forum who appreciate brown and the freedom of speech. Looks like NOBODY in TODAY, ST, MEDIACORP has ANY opinion on MICA's letter and Brown's article.
mr brown- you have my support. TODAY-i'm never picking it up again and i'm emailing all my friends.
Posted by: mentalman | Jul 6, 2006 8:52:26 AM
The first paragraph basically says it all.
At least that reporter in the USA who was thrown in jail stood by her conscience and refused to divulge her sources, even when the judge threw her in jail for contempt of court to let her 'think it through'.
Here our editors's hum ji attitude sickens me. What cowardice!
it's easy to snipe at the decision from here, you may do the same thing if it's your job, your condo mortgage, and your kid's next meal on the line .....
at least the column say the light of day huh .....
change doesn't happen overnight, nor should we expect it ..... but I think it's a good start ....
as an aside, Judith Millier knowingly committed an offence, by leaking a CIA agent's name, she not only jeapordized her life, but also the life and security of a whole string of others around her ... I think it's cowardly of her to hide behind the banner of "journalistic freedom" ... I think I've read enough of north american papers in the past few years to say that most of them doesn't care about anything except paper sales, and yes, papers here do take a stand too, after a while, you'll know which papers support which party from the editorial bent (and major shareholders) .... that sort of thing is not a pappy exclusive either ....