Ladies and Gentlemen,
Not wanting to be too brazen, may I say that I am gratified with what is happening in Singapore now. It is quite clear now that my work in political dissent there has not been in vain. Just look at it now. Not too long ago in 2008, I was arrested in Singapore for criticizing Singapore Judge Belinda Ang Saw Ean. After a great deal of publicity both locally and worldwide, I was sent to prison for 3 months.
As an ongoing occurrence, Dr. Chee Soon Juan and his brave supporters have been going to jail on a regular basis for civil disobedience.
More recently Alan Shadrake the British author was arrested for his criticism of the Singapore judiciary in his book. He plans to fight at his trial tomorrow. Singaporeans and the world have rallied to his cause.
Only yesterday a blogger had been arrested for writing that Vivian Balakrishnan, the Singapore Minister now known with scorn as "Comical Vivian" not unlike Saddam Hussein's "Comical Ali", should be "burned" together with his PAP.
Today another blogger was arrested for writing criticism of the shameful manner in which Shafie Goh was handcuffed and mistreated by police merely for taking pictures of Singapore's nationwide flooding.
Today there is a dejected looking picture of Vivian Balakrishnan in Singapore's state controlled press. Such a picture, looking sad and forlorn, always has a message in authoratarian regimes like Singapore. It can only mean "Comical Vivian" is on his way out. He gives a bad name for his blotching up the YOG games to a ever perfect image of Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore.
In Hitler's or Lee Kuan Yew's island, there is no tolerance for failure. In the one case, the firing squad. In the other dismissal and oblivion.
Goodbye Vivian. Good to have known you. Time you went to work in some government linked company trading with the Burmese military.
Having been an element responsible for instigating Singaporeans into unrest by this blog and my run ins with Lee Kuan Yew, I now sit back, continue writing and watch the fun.
The horse of public dissent has bolted from the barn. Now there is no stopping. The people are up in arms. Lee Kuan Yew would have to do one of 2 things, he has no choice. Either he has to keep arresting more and more Singaporeans for protesting, or he has to give in to freedom. And either way he loses.
This time, if indeed these protesters are the beginning of a tidal wave of islandwide dissent which I hope is the case, Lee Kuan Yew and his son better start worrying.
Gopalan Nair
the power of netizens
-
Its seems that netizens have a powerful influence nowadays. From celebrities clamming to authorities slamming to normal people slamming, the internet netizen voice seems like a important voice today.
I feel quite weird by this phenomenon. Most netizens voice are just that - noise. They got their own agenda and biases when they try to argue an issue and they do not think before they write much. WHy even bother about reporting these voices which are baseless?
-
讲自己�?
-
maybe it's because people are sick and tired of PAP state media where everything is PAP self praise, and glorifying of the PAP regime, so people feel drained by the endless PAP propaganda repetition and thus turn to the web where there is more freedom for people to express criticism and alternative views.
People turn to netizens because the sort of criticism can never be found in the PAP state media.
If PAP regime allows independent news outlets to exist, where editors can criticise PAP regime, maybe the influence of netizens will weaken, because people don't have to turn to web for views different from the PAP propaganda line.
-
The kind of press that is the SPH
We all know how the Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) censors and spins news to the advantage of the ruling party. So this piece is really nothing new except that in this instance you get to see up close how the people at the SPH operate. Get your barf bag ready.
As we reported here and here, the Straits Times (ST) ran a story about how popular Dr Teo Ho Pin is as Bukit Panjang's member of parliament. Earlier this year, however, groceries chain Sheng Siong Pte Ltd announced that it was buying over several wetmarkets across Singapore with the intention of turning them into supermarkets.
This created a furore with the vendors and stallholders who launched a petition expressing their opposition to the takeover as it would affect their livelihood. The matter acquired national prominence with Singaporeans also registering their concerns.
How often do you see Singaporeans, especially those who are not in political or civil society circles, organising a sign-up? Obviously, the matter was of grave concern to these folks.
The HDB stepped in to assure them that it would not allow Sheng Siong to turn the facilities into supermarkets. This was cold comfort to the stallholders as their primary concern was that the new owner would increase their rentals.
Their worst fears came true; Sheng Siong upped the rental of the stalls by an incredible 30 percent.
The shop operators would now have to do one of two things: Either absorb the rental increase which would mean that their earnings would immediately be cut 30 percent or pass on the cost increase to the shoppers.
Either that or they had to scale down their operations which meant they had to lay off workers. Many closed down and went out of business
Now back to the rah-rah ST article of Dr Teo. A sub-headline read: "Fajar wet market is 'not an issue'". That was a declaration by the MP himself.
Accompanying the headline was this picture (right) with the caption: "Madam Cham Mooi Kiong, 51, is one of the stallholders affected by the the rent hike at Fajar market but she continues to sell her vegetables and provisions at the sames prices."
No prizes for guessing what the ST is up to. Plastering the page with a photograph of a happy-looking stallholder would go a long way in helping to bury the fallout from the takeover. The stallholders have not raised prices and everyone is happy.
But is the matter as simple as that?
Is this scenario realistic given that rent hike was not 3 percent but 30 percent? Was Madam Cham's earnings affected? Did she have to open her stall longer? What about other stallholders? Did they increase their prices? What about those who have quit their businesses? Are they in even more hardship? What did the residents say?
These are questions that a newspaper with any self-respect would ask. And yet, ST completedly ignored them and set out to do a hack job of an article designed with only one thing in mind - to protect Dr Teo's position. Fajar market not an issue. Case closed.
This is how the media have been playing the game all these decades. With no alternative sources of news and analysis, Singaporeans have been denied the truth.Such unprofessionalism must not be allowed to continue. The Internet is an alternative source of news. While it may not yet have the reach that the ST has, the gap between the two media is closing and the more the SPH prints such rubbish and indulges in such shambolic journalism - if you can even call it journalism - the quicker the gap will narrow.
http://yoursdp.org/index.php/news/singapore/4057-the-kind-of-press-that-is-the-sph
-
Editorial: Lee Kwan Yew: a ratbag to the end
It seems the Australian government-academic establishment is running out of Asian autocrats to fete. Chancellor Allan Hawke and Vice Chancellor Ian Chubb of the Australian National University (ANU) are the latest to join the Australian movers and shakers who laud distasteful people -- in their case, former Singaporean prime minister Lee Kwan Yew, who now holds an ANU honorary doctorate.
That the ANU could impugn its reputation for excellence in Asian studies and human rights law to further the ambitions of its top two officers is surprising enough. That these men should ram through the award by shelving university processes of review and then praise Lee's "integrity," "commitment to advancing the causes of peace and prosperity" and "international statesmanship [sic]" is downright contemptible. But credit where credit's due: Lee would applaud their methods.
Hawke and Chubb, no doubt, will be unmoved to hear of Lee's most recent slur against a head of state -- hardly proper protocol, one might think, for the recipient of a gong for statesmanship. Nonetheless, on April 4, Lee trotted out an attack on President Chen Shui-bian (陳水�), saying that he was duping Taiwanese into believing that independence from China is possible because war would result and the US would not intervene.
The problem with this salvo was that it wasn't just personal; it was a bouquet to China and a put-down directed at millions of Taiwanese people who believe in democracy and liberty. So a personal attack on Lee for his cardigan despotism and hubris is perfectly in order -- because so much of Singapore and its neuroses are linked to Lee's person.
Lee's record on human rights is poor. He, like other autocrats in the region, demeans his people by labeling liberties of press and academic freedom as Western conceits that are not conducive to "Asian" societies. This mentality -- culturalist bordering on racist -- set up one of the more enduring intellectual hoaxes of the 1990s, namely that there exist "Asian values" (as opposed to Western or Judeo-Christian values, presumably, though his argument was never coherent). And these values, funnily enough, seem to absolve people such as Lee for oppressive behavior -- as long as an economic return is delivered.
Lee's legacy of authoritarianism lives on. This week saw the banning of a documentary about a long-time political prisoner in Singapore, Said Zahari. Suffice it to say that Singapore's credibility is shaky if it can't face up to events of 30 years ago and cites social order as a pretext for shutting down debate.
And if it wasn't clear before, it should be now: With the latest pay rise that lawmakers have awarded themselves (justification: lavishing millions of dollars on the "most talented" legislators and executive officials beats corruption), the Singaporean state can now be dubbed the world's most lucrative -- and sanitized -- protection racket. Lee, who these days goes under the risible title of "minister mentor," will himself pocket another small fortune. But even by Singaporean standards, this self-aggrandizement is so brazen that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has promised to donate his new riches to charity.
Lee Kwan Yew, his son and their supporters can keep their city-state kleptocracy and their largely pliant people. And long may he be courted by foreign academic powerbrokers and governments dazzled by his connections.
But Lee Kwan Yew is no friend of Taiwan. Until Singapore learns to deal with domestic political opponents other than by intimidating, bankrupting, arresting and torturing them, there is little to learn from Lee's fiefdom or his lectures. Taiwan has seen it all before -- and left it behind.
http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/archives/2007/04/14/2003356611
-
As long as PAP continues to control the mainstream media and use it as a tool to control society and preserve their rule, people will switch off from the PAP state propaganda and find an outlet to vent their frustrations against the PAP and their endless propaganda.
PAP's suppression of criticism, dissent is the real reason for the influence of netizens.
The Media, Cultural Control and Government in Singapore >
This book explores this inherent contradiction present in most facets of Singaporean media, cultural and political discourses, and identifies the key regulatory strategies and technologies that the ruling People Action Party (PAP) employs to regulate Singapore media and culture, and thus govern the thoughts and conduct of Singaporeans.
It establishes the conceptual links between government and the practice of cultural policy, arguing that contemporary cultural policy in Singapore has been designed to shape citizens into accepting and participating in the rationales of government.
Outlining the historical development of cultural policy, including the recent expansion of cultural regulatory and administrative practices into the ‘creative industries’, Terence Lee analyzes the attempts by the Singaporean authorities to engage with civil society, the ways in which the media is used to market the PAP’s policies and leadership and the implications of the internet for the practice of governmental control.
Overall, The Media, Cultural Control and Government in Singapore offers an original approach towards the rethinking of the relationship between media, culture and politics in Singapore, demonstrating that the many contradictory discourses around Singapore only make sense once the politics and government of the media and culture are understood.
-
the white party will never be voted out, not in our lifetimes, becoz they have installed a failproof system. unless there is one large calamity.
-
Originally posted by Vote PAP OUT to Save SG:
The kind of press that is the SPH
We all know how the Singapore Press
Holdings (SPH) censors and spins news to the advantage of the
ruling party. So this piece is really nothing new except that in
this instance you get to see up close how the people at the SPH
operate. Get your barf bag ready.
As we reported here and here, the Straits Times (ST) ran a story about how popular Dr Teo Ho Pin is as Bukit Panjang's member of parliament. Earlier this year, however, groceries chain Sheng Siong Pte Ltd announced that it was buying over several wetmarkets across Singapore with the intention of turning them into supermarkets.
This created a furore with the vendors and stallholders who launched a petition expressing their opposition to the takeover as it would affect their livelihood. The matter acquired national prominence with Singaporeans also registering their concerns.
How often do you see Singaporeans, especially those who are not in political or civil society circles, organising a sign-up? Obviously, the matter was of grave concern to these folks.
The HDB stepped in to assure them that it would not allow Sheng Siong to turn the facilities into supermarkets. This was cold comfort to the stallholders as their primary concern was that the new owner would increase their rentals.
Their worst fears came true; Sheng Siong upped the rental of the stalls by an incredible 30 percent.
The shop operators would now have to do one of two things: Either absorb the rental increase which would mean that their earnings would immediately be cut 30 percent or pass on the cost increase to the shoppers.
Either that or they had to scale down their operations which meant they had to lay off workers. Many closed down and went out of businessNow back to the rah-rah ST article of
Dr Teo. A sub-headline read: "Fajar wet market is 'not an issue'".
That was a declaration by the MP himself.
Accompanying the headline was this picture (right) with the caption: "Madam Cham Mooi Kiong, 51, is one of the stallholders affected by the the rent hike at Fajar market but she continues to sell her vegetables and provisions at the sames prices."
No prizes for guessing what the ST is up to. Plastering the page with a photograph of a happy-looking stallholder would go a long way in helping to bury the fallout from the takeover. The stallholders have not raised prices and everyone is happy.
But is the matter as simple as that?
Is this scenario realistic given that rent hike was not 3 percent but 30 percent? Was Madam Cham's earnings affected? Did she have to open her stall longer? What about other stallholders? Did they increase their prices? What about those who have quit their businesses? Are they in even more hardship? What did the residents say?
These are questions that a newspaper with any self-respect would ask. And yet, ST completedly ignored them and set out to do a hack job of an article designed with only one thing in mind - to protect Dr Teo's position. Fajar market not an issue. Case closed.
This is how the media have been playing the game all these decades. With no alternative sources of news and analysis, Singaporeans have been denied the truth.Such unprofessionalism must not be allowed to continue. The Internet is an alternative source of news. While it may not yet have the reach that the ST has, the gap between the two media is closing and the more the SPH prints such rubbish and indulges in such shambolic journalism - if you can even call it journalism - the quicker the gap will narrow.
http://yoursdp.org/index.php/news/singapore/4057-the-kind-of-press-that-is-the-sph
please get rid of SPH.
-
Originally posted by FireIce:
讲自己�?
This
-
I reckon we're quite fortunate the police don't knock on our doors yet.