Press Secretary of MICA response to Mr Brown article
-
Just a question: where is the relevance of your phrase above?Originally posted by TooFree:'The tolerance of evil will only breed greater evil.'
-
Your theory is intriging. Perhaps the editorial team of TODAY knew this was coming and just wanted to air the column before it got shut down?Originally posted by Fatum:c'mon, give the editor some credit .....
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 ....
Their version of freedom of speech perhaps? If even for a fleeting moment?
Still, bowing to the wishes of highhanded bureaucracy smacks of gerrymandering. I'd rather they advise brown to put in on his blog instead of publishing it. The lack of principles is disgusting.
So incidently, what kind of credit should i give the editor for selling out his source?
As for Judith Miller (tks for the name, it slipped my mind earlier), she may have knowingly committed an offence, but hey, at least she was 'noble' enough to keep her confidential sources confidential, and not change tack when threatened with jail time (which she incidently did, or is still doing)
You think it's cowardly to hide behind freedom of press? She's just single-minded in protecting her sources. That's living by your principles, right or wrong. -
Response from Reporters without borders
Government criticised for condemning “unconstructive” article
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=18208
It is not the job of government officials to take a position on newspaper articles or blog posts unless they are clearly illegal, Reporters Without Borders pointed out today after the Singaporean newspaper Today published an opinion piece by an official on 3 July condemning a recent post by blogger Lee Kin Mun as over-politicised and unconstructive.
“This reaction from a Singaporean official is disturbing,” the press freedom organisation said. “It reads like a warning to all journalists and bloggers in a country in which the media are already strictly controlled. The media have a right to criticise the government’s actions and express political views. Furthermore, a newspaper’s editorial policies depend solely on its editors. They should under no circumstances be subject to instructions issued by the government.”
Lee, who uses the pseudonym “mr brown,” wrote an article entitled “S’poreans are fed, up with progress!” for Today’s opinion pages on 30 June in which he criticised recent government measures and the constant cost-of-living rises in an amusing and acerbic fashion.
Krishnasamy Bhavani, a press secretary to the ministry of information, communications and arts, responded with an article published in Today on 3 July in which she defended her governmentÂ’s policies but went on to criticise Lee for taking a political position.
“It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government,” she wrote. “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.”
Lee is one of Singapore’s most popular bloggers. When the government banned political podcasts during the recent elections in April, the media largely took its cue from Lee’s position that, “Prison got no broadband,” in which he seemed to discourage bloggers from violating the new rules. But he nonetheless tested the authorities himself by posting a series of “persistently non-political podcasts” on his blog.
Reporters Without Borders was not able to reach Lee for a comment. -
The blogosphere defends one of their own.
The inutility of speaking truth unto power- the government took a blogger to task for "sarcasm" -
Hmm you are right.Originally posted by Fatum:well ... i agree to a certain extent on the feedbacks you speak of ...
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 ....
They are not afraid of U-turns, that's why they are as you put it 'obdurate and stubborn' with policies they uphold.
Look at the Stop At 2 family planning policy - now they want us to have oodles of babbies. -
Actually I think there is a simple reason why the press in Singapore can never be "free of government influence". The main reason it remains controlled is because Singaporeans do not bother that it has been controlled. How often does one read the newspapers and wonder "am I getting the whole story?". More often what happens is "Oh wow.. I see". The main problem is that the government has successfully created a sense of "credibility" in the media we have been legally exposed to today. What many do not realise is that most facts are credible except the fact that these facts are moderated to filter any anti-government articles. Only when Singaporeans truly realise this, and the importance of correcting this, then we will start heading towards the direction of having free press in Singapore.
-
In this era where the Govenrment want its people to be more actively involvement in Govenment policies (read feedback.govsg). An article with a mild hint of criticism, which is meant to be taken lighly is immediately* shot back. and the newspaper immediately suspends articles for fear of govenment backlash. Are we moving foward or backwards?
* Must appreciate her effort, though, for having to work over the weekend to come out with the reply, since now civil servants are now on 5 day work week -
how can we move forward like this?
-
*
-
When you have too many smarts in suits, this is what you get, out of touch governance for half of the time.Originally posted by edemonda:Actually I think there is a simple reason why the press in Singapore can never be "free of government influence". The main reason it remains controlled is because Singaporeans do not bother that it has been controlled. How often does one read the newspapers and wonder "am I getting the whole story?". More often what happens is "Oh wow.. I see". The main problem is that the government has successfully created a sense of "credibility" in the media we have been legally exposed to today. What many do not realise is that most facts are credible except the fact that these facts are moderated to filter any anti-government articles. Only when Singaporeans truly realise this, and the importance of correcting this, then we will start heading towards the direction of having free press in Singapore. -
so sad.... mr brown blog is suspended already...
-
I hope TODAY brings Mr Brown back soon cos I enjoy reading his articles- he is very humourous & witty.
-
i saluate you mr brown you dare to do what others wouldnt dare to if they were in your shoes and position. this shows the GUTS and INTEGRITY you possess. man.
You are da man. -
You Choose Professionalism, Integrity and Honesty over your rice bowl, Mr Brown, For that you got my deepest respect, This proves your worth and vaule as a journalist, colouminst and fellow human being.
Your Self Worth is very high Mr Brown. Unlike some woman who will betray her own consience and integrity for a few K per month. -
half?
most of them are in outer space and don't know it..Originally posted by LazerLordz:When you have too many smarts in suits, this is what you get, out of touch governance for half of the time. -
no what, still got entry today leh..Originally posted by mhcampboy:so sad.... mr brown blog is suspended already... -
We keep quiet, they say we're apathetic and urge us to speak up.
When we speak up, they call us whiners and shut us up if we try to criticise them.
So.... how?
Truly, Singapore's future looks bleak indeed. If the men in white suits up there in their ivory towers and peanut salaries can't even take a wee bit of sarcastic criticism, then I say we're screwed. Period.
Kudos to Mr Brown for having the gonads to speak up - unlike many other Singaporeans who couldn't be bothered about local issues and laugh at others who do.
We're already at 140 in the yearly press freedom ranking by the Reporters Without Borders. Who wants to bet that we'll be at 150 next year?
Or is 150 a bit too optimistic here? -
this incident aside, we do have to recognize that we have very different geo-political circumstances than those "liberal democracies". One big factor that pushed our rankings down, were the racist bloggers and more recently, the chap who reprinted that anti-christian thingy ... now, can we not agree that those were neccessary steps to preserve our social cohesion and harmony ? ... freedom of speech can only exist if there are responsible speech ... clearly, some sectors of society are not there yet. I think it would be naive and indeed fool hardy if we are to swallow wholesale every single idea or ideals from other countries.Originally posted by fudgester:We keep quiet, they say we're apathetic and urge us to speak up.
When we speak up, they call us whiners and shut us up if we try to criticise them.
So.... how?
Truly, Singapore's future looks bleak indeed. If the men in white suits up there in their ivory towers and peanut salaries can't even take a wee bit of sarcastic criticism, then I say we're screwed. Period.
Kudos to Mr Brown for having the gonads to speak up - unlike many other Singaporeans who couldn't be bothered about local issues and laugh at others who do.
We're already at 140 in the yearly press freedom ranking by the Reporters Without Borders. Who wants to bet that we'll be at 150 next year?
Or is 150 a bit too optimistic here?
that said, I do agree that it's one thing for the govt to preach about such things and extend the blanket to cover the political realm as well. Perhaps this was an over-reaction. However, I certainly do agree that if you're going to make some political statement, then be prepared to stand up and be counted. There are plenty of opposition sites out there, with quite virulent anti-PAP rhetoric out there, and no one got dragged away in the middle of the night eh ? ... (note that I write anti-PAP, not anti-govt, but of course, perhaps some people do not draw that distinction).
.... -
mr brown was never racist, anti-, communist, inciting..
his was pure and simple SATIRE
now, if a gabrament cannot handle satire, it says a lot about the maturity of the gabrament...
i wonder when they speak about maturity.. i wonder who the immature ones really are? -
Referring to the one in TODAY lar duh!!!Originally posted by TehJarVu:no what, still got entry today leh..
-
why did they suspend his column just because of one issue?
sibei jialat man!!! -
Because the government responded to his column, so its either Mr Brown goes, or TODAY goes, and definitely TODAY doesn't want to go.Originally posted by dragg:why did they suspend his column just because of one issue?
sibei jialat man!!!
-
The racist bloggers didn't bring down our rankings. It was the government's response to those bloggers that did. I am by no means condoning the actions of those bloggers (I'm Muslim, for your information), but I certainly object to them being dragged off to jail instead of being made to do community work or something. It brought about a very negative message here: 'If we don't like what you say, prepare to get it from us.'Originally posted by Fatum:this incident aside, we do have to recognize that we have very different geo-political circumstances than those "liberal democracies". One big factor that pushed our rankings down, were the racist bloggers and more recently, the chap who reprinted that anti-christian thingy ... now, can we not agree that those were neccessary steps to preserve our social cohesion and harmony ? ... freedom of speech can only exist if there are responsible speech ... clearly, some sectors of society are not there yet. I think it would be naive and indeed fool hardy if we are to swallow wholesale every single idea or ideals from other countries.
And like Bear said, where the heck did Mr Brown say anything to do with race or religion? Unless if you could somehow show that criticism of the ruling party would eventually lead to racial and religious bigotry which would then lead to social strife. That, my dear, is an extremely large leap of logic which requires a massive suspension of disbelief. I'll gladly shut my claptrap and stop posting in this thread if you could somehow come up with a really convincing explanation which will not make me ROFLMAO.
And yes, I agree that freedom of speech requires that it be used responsibly. So now, pray tell, how does criticism of ruling party equate to irresponsible speech? If you feel that your leaders aren't doing things right, then isn't it your responsibility to be voicing out your concerns and opinions?
The ruling party itself asked for feedback and urged people to speak up. Yet now it seems that they can't even handle satirical criticism.
Who's the one being irresponsible here? Mr Brown for the points that he brought up, or the ruling party for forcing him to shut up? -
-
Singapore now ranked 147th lahz! Even Somalia and Congo is ranked better than us...Originally posted by fudgester:We're already at 140 in the yearly press freedom ranking by the Reporters Without Borders. Who wants to bet that we'll be at 150 next year?
Or is 150 a bit too optimistic here?
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=11715
First world govt?
I remembered during a Workers' party rally, someone shouted "first world fiasco" when one of the speakers questioned whether PAP is a first world govt.