Do you agree that Newspapers, TV, Radio are very powerful?
-
It is ok lah... no apologies needed... there are all kinds and we need all kinds... the worse kinds are those that oppress and suppress others... as if they are more equal and they have more human rights while treating others like dirt... promoting their own views and suppressing other people's views... winning elections with dishonorable means...Originally posted by Bontakun:The few who are aware and tried to expose the ugly side of the governing and such (Durai case for example) are those who seek the truth and justice. The sad (or good?) thing is that, most of the citizens do not have the same curiousity or fervor in seeking the truth.
I used to put this in my siggy in the past: 'There are ALL kinds of people in the world'. How true that sentence is as we need a few people willing to take a step forward or sacrifice to educate the masses. How true it is that there are people like Durai. How true it is there are incompetent people in the higher rankings.
Actually, I am glad for those few who are out to seek the truth. This way we can see the picture even clearer. The thing is: I am one who do not want to be involved in any political issues. Too much of a hassle. I am more concerned with the path in which humanity treads, the enviornment and our future together.
Call me lazy or crazy. I am not bothered with nations, governance and their deep dark secrets. Governance WILL change hands, whether they like it or not. -
This is a classic example of BS that is coming from this forum, they can say all they want but they will never be able to stand by what they say.Originally posted by Rock^Star:That is your prerogative.
Speaker's Corner is BS? Well, some but not all. ST is worse, isn't it? BS with the word "skew".
Hence if you think that ST is bullshiting the news they are reporting could you please quote an article from ST that you can proof it is BS. -
So that's one of the problems, right? And a major one too. It's not like the PAP where riches await.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:hahaha if they offer me a job (and pay me) I might consider but I am not into politics as in running for office...
We all need a job to make ends meet.
What causes the low level of activity in spreading their party agenda around? Even Low Thia Khiang runs his own business, leaving him with limited time for WP. And Slyvia is still a lecturer?
It's a long and winding road for the opposition.
For a start, I don't mind contributing $10 a month to the party I support to ensure all members devote their entire time to party-building. -
We reap what we sow.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:It is ok lah... no apologies needed... there are all kinds and we need all kinds... the worse kinds are those that oppress and suppress others... as if they are more equal and they have more human rights while treating others like dirt... promoting their own views and suppressing other people's views... winning elections with dishonorable means...
What they do, we do not know 100%. BUT what they do, they will be held accountable for. It is only how each and every citizen sees and react during the whole thing that determines whether they are being oppressed, suppressed, compressed or something else. -
Get good AV people and post on u-tube, good writers, good IT consultants... for a start...Originally posted by Rock^Star:There must be a reason why opp parties do not push their agenda through emails.
They must also do more house visits, instead of only appearing near elections. One major problem is that they cannot hold public speeches for the masses. Oh well, technically they can but a permit is required and no guesses on whether the authorities shall approve it or not.
It's been more than a year since the elections and I have not passively heard any movement of significance from the opp parties.
MORE MUST BE DONE!!
House visits are good but if they cannot even do the effective and simple stuff like getting good producers and writers and push their message out to the masses.... no need to talk already lah...
Wait for people to come to the internet and read... hahahaha wait long long... -
Actually, personally I would prefer that Low and Silvia continue to work so that they are kept in touch with the reality that Singaporeans face day in day out... instead of million dollars salaried people that have no qualms taking public money and complain people choosing class C wards.Originally posted by Rock^Star:So that's one of the problems, right? And a major one too. It's not like the PAP where riches await.
We all need a job to make ends meet.
What causes the low level of activity in spreading their party agenda around? Even Low Thia Khiang runs his own business, leaving him with limited time for WP. And Slyvia is still a lecturer?
It's a long and winding road for the opposition.
For a start, I don't mind contributing $10 a month to the party I support to ensure all members devote their entire time to party-building. -
'Perception is Reality'. So as long as one can bring about a perception amongst the citizenry that all is fine and dandy, then that will make governing a whole lot easier right?
-
'Perception is reality' is different in everybody's eyes. But you have a valid point here. Which links back to my earlier posts on why many, if not most, people just wanted to live peacefully. They may have 'perceived' what they wanted to perceived? Or they did not perceive enough? Or some other factors.Originally posted by Quincey:'Perception is Reality'. So as long as one can bring about a perception amongst the citizenry that all is fine and dandy, then that will make governing a whole lot easier right? -
Right now the internet is losing its credibility ...
-
Just to clarify, when I say ST is BS, I'm referring mainly to political and economic news about Singapore.Originally posted by Gazelle:This is a classic example of BS that is coming from this forum, they can say all they want but they will never be able to stand by what they say.
Hence if you think that ST is bullshiting the news they are reporting could you please quote an article from ST that you can proof it is BS.
I suggest you go dig up info on Shin Corp. Read the ST version and also the Thai paper's version.
That is one example for a start. -
Granted, ST will most like not get caught in an outright lie, but being under the PAP's control for over 4 decades, its is more than enough time to create a perception of thier own choosing by reporting news in a manner that the ex ISD operatives in SPH call "Nation building". Read with an open mind, foreign newspapars about singapore together with local newpapers... even with middle ground between the multiple sources, SPH papers are still far from objective, espeically when it comes to human rights issues and such.Originally posted by Gazelle:This is a classic example of BS that is coming from this forum, they can say all they want but they will never be able to stand by what they say.
Hence if you think that ST is bullshiting the news they are reporting could you please quote an article from ST that you can proof it is BS.
Hence we get what I'd like to call "Emperor's New Clothes" syndrome. -
Our media is not ranked 154th in the world for nothing
. -
Originally posted by Rock^Star:Our media is not ranked 154th in the world for nothing.
We all agree that the mass media in Singapore is "skewed" towards promoting a certain agenda.Originally posted by Jontst78:Hence we get what I'd like to call "Emperor's New Clothes" syndrome.
In order for the opposition to compete, they have to push their views across and the best now seems to be through the email. Not everyone will read the emails but then not everyone reads the newspapers articles also.
You need good AV producers, writers/editors and IT consultants to get the job done properly.
As one of you pointed out, there is a problem with funding.
So how to PUSH! PUSH! PUSH! -
Venezuela replaces opposition TV with state network
Mon May 28, 2007 8:23AM EDT
By Brian Ellsworth and Christian Oliver
CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuela shut down an opposition television channel on Monday and replaced it with one promoting President Hugo Chavez's self-proclaimed socialist revolution in a move widely criticized as a threat to democracy.
Chavez has long sparred with opposition channels, which he calls "horsemen of the apocalypse" for backing a botched coup against him in 2002.
His opponents say the internationally condemned closure of RCTV will damage freedom of expression in the OPEC nation.
"This has exposed the abusive, arbitrary and autocratic nature of Chavez's government, a government that fears free thought, that fears opinion and fears criticism," said Marcel Granier, chief of RCTV, the country's oldest broadcaster.
The closure of the channel exposed the country's sharp political divide -- thousands of Chavez supporters held street parties while opposition demonstrators faced cordons of police, chanting anti-government slogans.
In a tearful farewell program, RCTV staff packed a studio and prayed together.
"Do not lose hope. We will see you soon," RCTV presenter Nelson Bustamante told viewers.
Twenty minutes after RCTV was pulled off air, the state channel started transmission with the national anthem conducted by Gustavo Dudamel, the 26-year-old Venezuelan who was appointed as music director of the Los Angeles Philharmonic.
Programming started with a concert of traditional melodies, interspersed with government trailers. After the concert, the channel planned to show a film on 19th-century commander Simon Bolivar, Chavez's hero who freed much of South America from Spain.
CENTRALIZING THE STATE
Since becoming president in 1999, Chavez has centralized power, politicizing the judiciary, military and oil industry.
But before the closure of RCTV, political analysts had identified Venezuela's critical media as one of the main guards against him forging a Cuban-style system in the footsteps of his mentor, communist leader Fidel Castro.
The closure was condemned by the U.S. Senate and the EU Parliament, but Chavez's supporters justified the move by criticizing the journalistic ethics of the channel.
RCTV ran movies and cartoons when the tide turned in Chavez's favor in the 2002 coup, and refused to show huge crowds of the president's supporters rallying against the coup leaders.
Pollster Datanalisis found almost 70 percent of Venezuelans opposed the shut-down, but most cited the loss of their favorite soap operas rather than concerns about limits on freedom of expression.
Among the Chavez supporters swigging beer and dancing in the streets of central Caracas, some thought the president should go further and shut down the few remaining opposition networks, such as Globovision.
"They all participated in the coup and incited violence," said shopkeeper Jose Quijada, 58, wearing the hallmark red T-shirt of Chavez supporters.
But Wilmer Granadillo, a cameraman doing his last shift at RCTV, said: "It is sad, so sad. This was my second home."
Most dictatorial regimes would want to control the media, to control the people's thoughts and ideas. -
Singapore never even had an opposition television channel before ....Originally posted by maurizio13:Venezuela replaces opposition TV with state networkMon May 28, 2007 8:23AM EDT
By Brian Ellsworth and Christian Oliver
CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuela shut down an opposition television channel on Monday and replaced it with one promoting President Hugo Chavez's self-proclaimed socialist revolution in a move widely criticized as a threat to democracy.
Chavez has long sparred with opposition channels, which he calls "horsemen of the apocalypse" for backing a botched coup against him in 2002.
His opponents say the internationally condemned closure of RCTV will damage freedom of expression in the OPEC nation.
"This has exposed the abusive, arbitrary and autocratic nature of Chavez's government, a government that fears free thought, that fears opinion and fears criticism," said Marcel Granier, chief of RCTV, the country's oldest broadcaster.
The closure of the channel exposed the country's sharp political divide -- thousands of Chavez supporters held street parties while opposition demonstrators faced cordons of police, chanting anti-government slogans.
In a tearful farewell program, RCTV staff packed a studio and prayed together.
"Do not lose hope. We will see you soon," RCTV presenter Nelson Bustamante told viewers.
Twenty minutes after RCTV was pulled off air, the state channel started transmission with the national anthem conducted by Gustavo Dudamel, the 26-year-old Venezuelan who was appointed as music director of the Los Angeles Philharmonic.
Programming started with a concert of traditional melodies, interspersed with government trailers. After the concert, the channel planned to show a film on 19th-century commander Simon Bolivar, Chavez's hero who freed much of South America from Spain.
CENTRALIZING THE STATE
Since becoming president in 1999, Chavez has centralized power, politicizing the judiciary, military and oil industry.
But before the closure of RCTV, political analysts had identified Venezuela's critical media as one of the main guards against him forging a Cuban-style system in the footsteps of his mentor, communist leader Fidel Castro.
The closure was condemned by the U.S. Senate and the EU Parliament, but Chavez's supporters justified the move by criticizing the journalistic ethics of the channel.
RCTV ran movies and cartoons when the tide turned in Chavez's favor in the 2002 coup, and refused to show huge crowds of the president's supporters rallying against the coup leaders.
Pollster Datanalisis found almost 70 percent of Venezuelans opposed the shut-down, but most cited the loss of their favorite soap operas rather than concerns about limits on freedom of expression.
Among the Chavez supporters swigging beer and dancing in the streets of central Caracas, some thought the president should go further and shut down the few remaining opposition networks, such as Globovision.
"They all participated in the coup and incited violence," said shopkeeper Jose Quijada, 58, wearing the hallmark red T-shirt of Chavez supporters.
But Wilmer Granadillo, a cameraman doing his last shift at RCTV, said: "It is sad, so sad. This was my second home."
Most dictatorial regimes would want to control the media, to control the people's thoughts and ideas. -
"This has exposed the abusive, arbitrary and autocratic nature of Chavez's government, a government that fears free thought, that fears opinion and fears criticism,"
So, does it place Singapore Govt in the same category as the above? -
Of course, in war,propagandas through media are very important to break people's will and if bukit timah hill falls, you can start hearing some crappy broadcasts.
-
I think you must be very young... there used to be newspapers that criticized the government and were forced to closed down or forced to be take over by "friendly, obedient running dogs"Originally posted by Trump_Card:Singapore never even had an opposition television channel before .... -
"The media is the right arm of Anarchy." - Dan Brown in his book "Angels & Demons".