NTU censors campus news coverage of Chee Soon Juan visit (updated)
Wednesday, 17 September 2008, 10:05 pm | 6,309 views
Updated: This is the updated version of the earlier report.
Terence Lee / Youth Editor
Dr Chee Soon Juan created a whirlwind when he paid a surprise visit to NTU, but left behind only a whimper as the university censored all campus news coverage of his arrival.
The latest issue of NTU’s campus newspaper, The Nanyang Chronicle , was published on Monday (15th September), and was slated to feature an article about Dr Chee’s visit. In the end, it featured only a visit of a different sort – that of the former President of India, Dr APJ Abdul Kalam, who is a stranger among Singaporean students.
On 26th August, the controversial opposition figure, together with several other Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) leaders, visited NTU to distribute flyers and interact with the students. The NTU visit was part of a tour by the SDP to “raise political awareness,” and it included NIE, SMU and NUS as well. The NUS visit, which happened on 11th September, was covered by the university’s student-run online newspaper, The Campus Observer .
Student journalists from the Chronicle and NTU’s student-run news magazine programme, Nanyang Spectrum , were quick to converge on Dr Chee and the SDP members to conduct interviews.
Mr Philip Lim, 23, head of Nanyang Spectrum, was in-charge of producing the news clip for Dr Chee’s visit. Equipped with a video camera, he was on-site to document his visit, but he had trouble finding students to interview.
“This has never occurred to me before, even after many months on Spectrum. I suspect it’s due to the sensitivity of the topic,” he said.
He also recalled how some students whom he spoke to did not know who Dr Chee was. “Someone even asked me if he was the national table tennis coach who just got sacked!” he added. The question, in fact, is a misnomer; the coach in question, Mr Liu Guodong, is in talks to renew his contract with the Singapore Table Tennis Association to help prepare the national team for the 2012 London Olympics.
However, any excitement that their news items would appear on print or screen died down quickly. Mr Lim recalled how he had to remove two out of the three soundbites he planned to use, after some advice from his professors. Further edits were made thereafter, until he felt it was “neutral enough already.”
Despite these measures, the episode was shown for less than three days before the university’s corporate communications department ordered the episode to be taken off-the-air for good.
The article slated for the Nanyang Chronicle was also axed. (Picture, left: The in-house advertisement that was created to replace the Chee Soon Juan story.) After much negotiation between the paper’s teacher-advisors and the university, NTU president Su Guaning gave the article the go-ahead. However, he changed his mind at the last minute, and the article was removed just one day before the newspaper’s publication on Monday (15th September). Many of the student editors at the Chronicle were clearly indignant when they learnt about this.
One of them, 3rd year communications studies student Cheryl Ong, 21 — who is also the Chronicle’s news editor — wrote on her blog: “The reason given for the censorship left a bad taste in my mouth. I can’t really talk about what my teacher told us, because it was mostly his conjecture—’They’ have yet to tell us the official reason.”
She also wrote how “a number of journalism students were rather disgruntled” when the incident transpired.
Chief editor Lin Junjie, 23, said that while they “do not necessarily agree with all executive decisions made by the owner or the publisher”, their journalists have “done their best” to cover every story, including the one that was censored.
“The situation wasn’t within our control as we’re funded by them,” he said.
According to Associate Professor Benjamin Detenber, Chair of NTU’s Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information (WKWSCI), which runs both campus media, the university’s position is that the story was killed because “there was a feeling of concern over the use of student media to publicise and promote the unsolicited views of an uninvited person to the campus.”
But 22-year-old NTU student Naresh Ethan Subhash, who is currently studying film, remained highly critical. He said: “I’m really frustrated. Being university students, we are people who can think for ourselves. If they want to create an institution of higher education, censoring the campus media is totally unacceptable.”
However, Mr Sng Weiliang, a 22 year-old business student, offered another perspective: “I guess they feel that younger people tend to be more myopic, that’s why they want to prevent us from being influenced.”
Literature student Elaine Lee, 20, felt that the censorship questions the student’s analytical ability.
“If we aren’t exposed to anything, how can we be expected to gauge one political view from another?” she added.
Headline picture from Campus Observer.
———–
Email this to a Friend
Bookmark this
Such censorship is very regrettable.. c’mon man.
Thankfully the CO has published it.
I was wondering if a PAP visit will be as such. But then again, a PAP visit might not get such interest in the first place to begin with I think.
There is no free press even at NTU. Just like what I had mentioned before - it is things like this that stifle the intellectual environment on campus and make Singapore universities not well-positioned to offer an all-rounded education and personal development to its students than its lower-ranked peers.
Why not publish here?
i’m sad that even the media in my uni is as such.
i think the Chee Soon Juan oppositiion party is the most lousy party…
always made BAD on singapore opposition party…
hai…
don appear in public any more.hahas..
but i want to see other opposition party in the public more often..
such as WP or others..
i would like to hear their policy and ideas toward singapore future.
@young generation@
This is typical of jumpy Singaporean managers trapped in a climate of fear (or rather ignorance). They must be thinking: “If I allow any publicity to Chee’s visit, the govt will cut my research funds”.
But if you ask the govt, they probably won’t even care.
To me, this is a bigger threat to healthy development of civil society and the opposition, than the PAP’s partisan tactics like disallowing cycling events by opposition.
Last few weeks, Thailand university students stop to attend class , stop to take examination and join mob gangs (NOT legal political party) to occupied 4 international airports. Airport operation, tourism, essential supply like medicine and aircraft emergency landing (if any) were disrupted.
THIS PARTICULAR PROTEST IS ANTI-HUMANISTIC. The University student nerver understand their consequences of such action. Why?
University student are covered by SMOKE OR HAZE !
Who create the HAZE?
Eh, just because they publish it doesn’t mean they are “promoting it”. This guy came by, news happened, news gets published… not.
“there was a feeling of concern over the use of student media to publicise and promote the unsolicited and uninvited visit of Dr Chee to the campus.”
This is not right ? Did someone let the cat out of the bag again ?
So how many countless times the State media use to publicise and promote the unsolicited and uninvited visit of PAP politician anywhere in Singapore and in the world ?” How about Prataman visiting charity ? How about Joker Lee cycling ? etc.
Why these intellectuals never mention anything about the state media. Don’t the NTU students read state media too ?
Look like some people are more equal than others.
Mee Siam Mai Hum, Mai Hum, Mai Hum !
i’m glad that TOC published this story to shame NTU. shame on you, NTU.
not that NUS would have run the story. The Campus Observer managed to publish it because it’s totally student run, with no say from the admin. if the admin had any say, it would have been censored too.
but come on lar, even the government owned straits times covers the opposition parties. the universities scared for no reason.
I noticed there is another Victor here, so from now on I’ll add my surname…
Sad, but not surprising. Being ex-NUS I have no doubt at all that NUS would have done the same thing. In fact, life in NUS appears to be a microcosm of S’pore society…when fee hikes or policy changes are implemented, the students are “consulted” but ultimately the administrators will just do what they want. Everyone on the ground expresses discontent but no one takes solid action.
I guess it’s their way of preparing uni students for life as a working adult in SG, might as well get used to censorship.
I think the majority thinks that the system is fair and equal.
regards
pragmatism extremist nut
the NTU journalists should stand up for their rights.
If they do not fight for their journalistic independence, then what is the point of being journalists?
they should stand up to the NTU administrators and tell them that they will not stand for such ’self-censorship’ even when there’s nothing to be censored.
Band together and if the NTU admins threaten to shut down the newspaper, then walk out.
If NTU actually shuts down the newspaper, it would be a very big loss to the undergraduate and graduate journalism programs. They can’t afford to shut it down, so there is really nothing to loose if journalist students were to stand up for independent journalism.
[...] SDP’s official request for visit to the campus, and NTU has taken one step further by censoring their student newspaper from publishing a news article & interview about the [...]
“However, Mr Sng Weiliang, a 22 year-old business student, offered another perspective: “I guess they feel that younger people tend to be more myopic, that’s why they want to prevent us from being influenced.”
The above quote sums up the entire motive of the NTU administrator.
Any wonder why our tertiary students remained just as blur even after they graduate?
By their actions the NTU authorities are doing a great disservice to their students and Singapore in the wider context. Are we any different from a communist state?
I can understand why Chee would want to garner support in the university. Afterall, these are probably one of the few bastion of people who won’t know about or fully appreciate his past mistakes….
I disagree about politicising the education system though…
Politics is everywhere in your daily lives. Depoliticisation is a pipe dream really.
Agree with Koshy.
Don’t be a tease. Print the piece!
Copyright holder (uni?) objecting?
Hi lim #19,
Charles De Gaulle, french general and first president of the 5th Republic of France, once said, “I have come to the conclusion that politics are too serious a matter to be left to the politicians.”
[...] Daily Discourse - TOC: Yip Pin Xiu, an awesome achievement! - TOC: NTU censors campus news coverage of Chee Soon Juan visit (updated) [...]
So much for independent university, now is it wonder Singaporean look down on their government, university and country ? Even western foreigner that Singapore gov so love, look down on Singaporean for having no back bone, can’t act and think independently, and we know why.
[...] 公民在线Terence Lee报道和The Campus [...]
@ DC,
Definitions from the Devil’s dictionary by Ambrose Bierce….
Politics: A strife of interests masquerading as a contest of principles. The conduct of public affairs for private advantage.
Politician: An eel in the fundamental mud upon which the superstructure of organized society is reared. When we wriggles he mistakes the agitation of his tail for the trembling of the edifice. As compared with the statesman, he suffers the disadvantage of being alive.
http://www.gutenberg.org/files/972/972-h/972-h.htm
Shame on you NTU administration. Pathetic attempt at censorship has now given the issue a national audience, and your snivelling excuses are put on display for the whole country to see.
I think politics and education should not mix just like religions. If I send my children to the University - I want them to concerntrate on their studies and if they so wish to be in politics - do it when they are finished with their studies.
Knowing what politics are - is good general knowledge, broadening the mind, etc
Getting involved - is a different game altogether. I think it is not a good idea for CSJ or PAP to go around Uni to sell their ideals….
tsk tsk
Cheers
it has always been the same
different people gets different treatment
u seldom see news about opposition on media, except when they get into trouble.
but sadly to be fair, Dr Chee S J seldom have good and constructive ideas as he is probably better in attracting attention.
While on one hand the government is opening up (seen as many as tokenism), it is gaining momentum on its crackdown to show that it has not lost its bite. Besides Chee, the Tak Boleh group, Ravi, Nair and WSJA are the new additions.
Temasek wants to go to the International jourts to fight the judgements of the Indonesian courts. Then the FEER and WSJA should be allowed to go to the International courts to fight their cases. Especially the WSJA which according to the AG and impugned the courts. It is not ironic then that you are asking the same courts to decide.
Can anyone enlighten us on why WSJA cannot insist to fight the case elsewhere, like Temasek insisted.
Shocking. As a graduate of the Wee Kim Wee School which complied with the President’s veto, I am disappointed.
All they taught us about — pursuit of the truth, the flourishing of the marketplace of ideas — they’re pulling out now. If my so-called forward-thinking alma mater is afraid to do precisely what it is supposed to do, I am not proud to be its graduate.
Some complain about not mixing education with politics. Can we then do something about the PAP kindergartens?
To me, politics is like porn. Like it or not it’s everywhere,and the more you try to shield people from it and prevent them from forming their own opinion (once they are capable holding opinions), the more you either (a) breed lifelong ignorance / apathy, (b) push them to actively seek it out, or worse (c) instil serious misconceptions.
Don’t get me wrong, I personally am not fond of CSJ’s past behaviour. However, PAP ministers routinely hold dialogue / forum sessions to engage university students. Apart from CSJ not doing it in a lecture theater, what’s the difference? This is a fundamental question of liberty, though perhaps in this part of the world it is a rhetorical question.
I think I must clarify that the university’s position does not necessarily reflect that of the faculty. The ultimate decision to axe the article came from the NTU president, not WKWSCI.
If anyone is looking for some action, go enrol in an overseas uni even univ of UofToledo also can. Join students union there and u get some action. Don’t that here. But o’seas or local scholars who return here, pleasex1000 don’t wase ur time giving out flyers at MRT stations. Make urself credible. Dont just regurgitae facts or expound theories, practise “The Art of Crooked Thinking’ and give answers here as though others are damn stupid.
In addition to gery matter, one needs that X-factor to survive and be successful in life. Unless you can afford to loaf around here 24/7.
Did I hear Singapore really got free speech and media meh?
Sorry don’t meant to sound cocky.
Cheers
Even TOC must ‘moderate’ my postings here. What do you expect from NTU. NUS, SMU, ans what have you here. No offense to TOC but why the need to ‘moderate’? Is there no free speech here?
I was hoping all my life that Dr Chee could be Singapore’s saviour. Very disappointed.
No wonder NTU is persistently regarded as the inferior brother of NUS. Even SMU is held in higher esteem than NTU nowadays. I speak from experience, being a current first-year uni student who had asked many people for their opinions on the universities when deciding which one to go to.
Hey Terence, gotcha. I realise that. But the school remained quiet about the issue, choosing instead to merely repeat the university’s sentiments. Does it not have a voice of its own? Can’t it state that?
I perfectly understand the faculty’s position, and I do not expect more out of them. It’s just like if you are an employee of an organisation, it’s standard practice for you not to speak out against your employers. I will not fault them on this. It is the same at any organisation anywhere, I believe.
Students, on the other hand, are not employees of the school, and we are therefore entitled to voice our opinions.
Jeron, yes, I am ashamed. Terence, can we publish the news story here?
i’m still seeking permission from the writer of that article.
@Michael 5.04pm & 5.11pm
TOC care to answer? Who else had done more other than JBJ, SL & LTK?
(#41) Pondefecator:
1. Perhaps TOC has set certain parameters to flag out certain postings to ‘moderate’. I respect that coz they own this blog. I am old school who play by the rules. Never use vulgraities, rudeness or offensive words. I’ve seen worst things on this site. So I wonder why the need to moderate?
Some pple here think that I ‘attack’ them personally and sounded ‘cocky’ but it was never in my blood to do that. What irks me most is tht if anyone has views to say put it nicely on TOC and don’t just spew them out here like regurgitating some facts, expounding some therories plugged from somewhere and then assume that this fellow So Stupid and must teach him how to suck eggs. Basically that was it.
2. I agree that the veteran opp pple you mentioned have done much. My meaning was I looked at Dr Chee as the younger more educated one who could do even more. His past performance we all know. Period.
With regards to Dr Chee, please take some time out to download and listen to his podcast archive. He is not as bad as the mass media had portrayed him. It has always been standard practise in mass media to either put opposition politician out of the spotlight or misrepresent them on sensitive issues.
NTU administrators’ actions alone have inadvertently helped to give the students a clearer idea of what this PAP govt is about. CSJ should feel vindicated because it shows up the govt as being hypocritical and lacking integrity.
What world class education if students are discouraged from critical thinking?
If CSJ represents nonsense, than the more reason for NTU students to engage him and ask the questions. A govt that that has much to hide and answer obviously will show fear and this is reflected by the silly laws stifling political participation.
Banning of cycling events, 5 or more assembly of people can be illegal, etc, except that such laws can be circumvented by the PAP members and their supporters. Now we have NTU’s negative response to CSJ’s presense. All students in Singapore including NTU can draw their conclusions on this govt.
This govt just gets more stupid and desperate each time they come out to defend their position. The young men and women whether in school or in the work force are the future and this govt has done themselves in by losing their trust and respect. Singapore deserves better than a bunch of fruitcakes running the country !
Self-censorship so insidious that they will eventually choke themselves, even if the PAP govt won’t care about whether CSJ can influence Impressionable University Students?
A school should not be involved in politics?
make sense? i no no ler.
yibah yibah untooneh!
# DP did not seek approval of NTU for its visit. Technically, SDP trespassed NTU campus.
# Student media should not be exploited as publicity for political parties, SDP in this case.
# The approval of publicising the SDP article would mean that the student media can report on any agents or company representatives that came uninvited to NTU campus and grant them free publicity as well.
# Student media should be objective in nature.
# The Nanyang Chronicles aims to provide “timely campus news and information as well as being the voice of the campus population.” Therefore, it was right of NTU to publish the visit of former President of India, Dr APJ Abdul Kalam instead. He attended a conferment ceremony in NTU, which is drew more crowd and is of more significance to the campus population than the handful of students who stayed around the SDP.
Not My Sdp (#47):
1. If what you say is true, all the NUS/SMU students who have been visiting their friends at NTU are also trespassing. They are not being invited by NTU.
2. Is reporting of politics on student media consider exploiting? What about cases of Straits Times misrepresenting / misquoting Opposition politicians? Aren’t those exploiting too?
3. An objective media reports politics too.
4. Why should be a foreigner be rated higher than a local who laid down his life for his political beliefs?
a disgrace to use Mr. Wee’s name on this school of COMMUNICATION and INFORMATION.
A university that doesn’t treat its student like a thinking adult should not call itself a university. A university that dare to criticize other countries’s politics but not own politics is a disgrace to the whole world. Who give this university to criticize other countries that it will not do to its own country ? Politics is part of a country’s history and heritage, without those, a country is nothing. It doesn’t deserve to call itself university but Factory that spawn robots that programmed to think partisan and one way. Opss.. by the way, why the student paying ten of thousands in study fees when they are treated as a kid ? They should pay kid’s fee.
NOT MY SDP, you have good points. indeed true, perhaps chee recognises that he can manipulate the campus media for his own publicity purposes. perhaps he expouses lies and only lies.
the indignance, you see, is that the students were told they are adults but treated like children. i suspect they would have been equally angry if they had written on rabbits or snakes or kangaroos, and yet been censored. it’s the fact that they were treated like kids by a paternalistic school that “knows what is best for them.” the students are thinking: “can we not think for ourselves?”
i see it as reflective of singaporean society, that is paternalistic, and views its own citizens as children. “oh we better not screen gay shows, if not they all will turn gay and have sex all the time and get HIV” “o if we show gay shows they will over-react and riot”. it’s analogous to the parent who ALWAYS treats his child like a child. Seriously, no matter how old you get, your mother always will treat you like a child.
i think things get put into perspective when you see that the relationship between the PAP and the people is like a father and his child. the child rebels, but the parent knows (or THINKS he knows) what is best for the child.
and sometimes, the parent canes the child when the child gets naughty.
Gus: 28) Gus on September 18th, 2008 2.01 pm I think politics and education should not mix just like religions. If I send my children to the University - I want them to concerntrate on their studies and if they so wish to be in politics - do it when they are finished with their studies.
Knowing what politics are - is good general knowledge, broadening the mind, etc
Getting involved - is a different game altogether. I think it is not a good idea for CSJ or PAP to go around Uni to sell their ideals….
– in response to you, may i suggest that it is hard to “know” something, yet not get personally/emotionally involved. so, it is inevitable that i will take a certain stand when i learn about politics. maybe i would support PAP, maybe i would support Chee Soon Juan. how can a person not form an opinion of his own towards knowledge? if such a person exists, then his education is useless, he is only capable of vomitting information fron a textbook.
so, i suggest, true education of politics means that someone needs to get emotionally and personally involved. maybe he need not be a politician, but the knowledge needs to touch his heart rather than fly over his head.
if what you learn doesn’t affect you and change the way you live, then you are a photocopier of textbooks.
Oh come’on Local University Students…
We all know you can’t think critically.
You guys just know how great your school is and how you are the cream of the crop…
From : A sour grape (not!) whose eyes are opened and popped out studying overseas.
[...] officials asked him to stop. SDP also visits NTU @ <a href=”SDP visits The Deck @ The Online Citizen: The SDP also made a visit to NTU, and the official documentation suffered censorship at Nanyang [...]
Bravo, Donalsdon. We need more objective thinkers like you.
Weijia, not fair to diss WKWSCI. They kena pwned by University level. I don’t think they could break rank. I hope they do, and say why publishing is good, but the implications would be highly non-beneficial. The problem lies with upper management.
It is the duty of the students now to do something themselves, make their voices heard.
NOT MY SDP,
#1) If that part of the university campus is deemed a private area where trespassing is forbidden, then why isn’t it fenced up like a secondary school or condominium as opposed to a common void deck?
#2) Unless I misunderstand, SDP did not specifically request the student media to run an article, nor did they offer any payment to do so. They did it of their own free will, I don’t think this counts as exploitation.
#3) If someone decided to jump into Singapore River naked without an invitation and it gets reported in the news, isn’t that free publicity as well? The basic idea is that the media producers/editors (and by extension the public that consumes the media) decide what is worth publishing and deserving of publicity.
#4) Isn’t disallowing the article to be published already an exercise in subjective judgement?
#5) By all means report on the Indian president, but how does this affect whether the SDP article should be published? The fact that the article was withdrawn at the last minute indicates that publishing space was not an issue, otherwise it would have been vetoed in the early stage. Two entirely unrelated matters in my opinion.
Your comments lead me to think that you are already approaching this issue with a certain bias. If this is not the case, then I’d like to hear your arguments.
Looks like the NTU top management is pro-govt as well. Totally disappointed with their so-called higher education.
Politics is about everyone and should not be determined by just the top management. Rather they should let the students decide for themselves what kind of perspective they should uphold towards different political reception. I think the student should just go attend political rallies during the next election in 2011.
” Mr Sng Weiliang, a 22 year-old business student, offered another perspective: “I guess they feel that younger people tend to be more myopic, that’s why they want to prevent us from being influenced.”
Is this guy an idiot or what? More myopic? Prevent from being influenced? Hello? Is this some 14 yr old kids who are young and impressionable? “Easily influenced”? How did he even get into a university in the first place?
This is so totally absurd. If the tertiary institutions do not want their students influenced by politicians or politics, perhaps the govt should ban students from going to Speakers Corner to listen to political speeches.
Again, a stupid policy is being defended by even more stupid rationale.
First, Ho Peng Kee. Now even our professors in a supposedly world-class education institution are behaving like morons. I can only hope the students themselves will stand up for themselves.
It would be unbelieveably sad if these students, who will become our leaders in society and even in govt, choose to be treated like nothing better than sheep.
No wonder Lee Hsien Loong has a hard time looking for the next generation of leaders. He forgets that it may be because of how the govt prevents potential leaders from being exposed to the REAL world - and not the PAP make-believe fantasy.
Yup. Terrence, students are not employees of the school. If anything, we pay school fees to keep things going.
About this:”Dr Chee Soon Juan created a whirlwind when he paid a surprise visit to NTU, but left behind only a whimper as the university censored all campus news coverage of his arrival.” Now let’s reverse that sentence for kicks.
Dr. Chee created a whimper when he came to school,but left a whirlwind when he left.
As the writer, being with the story the whole way, I would say there’s more truth in this!Many students whom I interviewed were rather apathetic, indifferent about Chee’s visit. In contrast, the censorship of the story has left behind a whirlwind of events for WKWSCI and the Chronicle.From fighting from the life of the article, to grappling with censorship and dealing with it gracefully.
The experience wasn’t pleasant at all,but our journalism teachers spent hours trying to explain a university point of view.Knowing what they stand for, Im sure it must have been a nasty task for them, their hearts and obligations pulled in two different directions.
Unlike what this TOC article reflects, the University wasnt secretive with the explanation, they tried to give us one. And Daniel yes, you are correct:”there was a feeling of concern over the use of student media to publicise and promote the unsolicited and uninvited visit of Dr Chee to the campus”, this is the official reason.Unsolicited visitor as the university puts it, is not specific to Dr Chee, but rather any insurance agent, evangelical Christian, salesman etc. trying to prey on University students to get their message through.
Having recognised all these nuances and the University’s position, I am still miffed.The Chronicle I believe should primarily be students for students and Chee’s visit is legitimately newsworthy on all counts, it’s something students are interested to read about. I believe the Chronicle is not to be treated as a school newsletter publicising the glories of NTU, and covering other issues of worthy concern.
and from the University,I hope we get the respect we deserve as a newspaper, because that’s about the only thing that motivates an effective journalist.Without that respect, it is hard to come up with a newspaper with sting,or anything that the school community would think is worth reading afterall.This wld not be to the advantage of the financier of the newspaper ie. NTU.
And Im sorry NTU Corp Comms. This is the 21st century world, there is the Internet and online spaces to express our points of view, there is no escaping from this reality.
It might be quiet in school,but it will not be quiet online. The world is changing, and so must the University.
Bravo kash. About your hope for the function of The Chronicle, let me encourage you it is more than that — full reportage is the purpose / right of a newspaper. NTU have their countless PR magazines already, to touch Chron is ridiculous. Keep fighting for journ, we’re beside you.
Facebook users: Join the ‘Stand Up for Media Freedom on Campus’ group, let’s try to hit 1000 members!
WHY should Dr.Chee Soon Chuan be in the first place given any attention than any other lecturers visiting the campus???? Is it because few find him to be the ‘leader’ or ‘voice’ for the opposition? If thats the case, such attention must be given to the Worker’s Party MP Mr.Low. who won an election and sitting in parliament.
Dr.Chee disappoints me in all angles. DOCTOR Chee perhaps best suits as an academic pro, NEVER meant for political office!
Dr.Chee wants to be an opposition for the sake of been an opposition, opposing the govt. for every frivolous issues - his wayward actions often lands him against the law, the same law which he must abide as a Singaporean…. It would take a genius or maverick to form a credible opposition here and sorry Dr.Chee does not fit that bill at all.
I just hope that his ‘acts’ so far are scripted and orchestrated by himself and not
used as a stooge by groups ‘hiding’ in foreign lands or behind smoke screens.
Dr.Chee should take a long leave and re-adddress his approach before he lands safely as a credible opposition.
63) V S RAAJ on September 19th, 2008 3.00 pm
“WHY should Dr.Chee Soon Chuan be in the first place given any attention than any other lecturers visiting the campus???? ”
Simply because he has galvanised enough & significant support for them to make noise of unfairness if it is perceived to be so.
Dr.Chee may not fit that bill at all for people like you. But for a lot of people in the sideline, a lot has yet to be seen.
“I just hope that his ‘acts’ so far are scripted and orchestrated by himself and not
used as a stooge by groups ‘hiding’ in foreign lands or behind smoke screens.”
If you are so noble & righteous, why not try identify yourself with your full name & other useful identifiable profile. Orelse, your own labelling of stooge hiding behind smoke screen also applies to people like you.
V S RAAJ #63
[I just hope that his ‘acts’ so far are scripted and orchestrated by himself and not
used as a stooge by groups ‘hiding’ in foreign lands or behind smoke screens.]
The above statement exposed naivety if not bias-ness of a brainwashed person! Treason to a country is a death sentence punishment, once proven. But then, why was it not being use on Dr Chee, if the PAP Govt have the so called proof since they always wanted us Singaporeans (V S RAAJ inclusive) to believe that Dr Chee received foreign helps? The way PAP go about attacking Dr Chee, it was as if Dr Chee is a terrorist, waiting and wanting to destroy Singapore in a violent way, with the help from foreigners.
In any case, has the PAP Govt proven the guilt of Chia Thye Poh for allegedly conducting pro-communist activities against the Government and was imprisoned for 32 years without trial or charge? Did Chia being convicted in an open court?
Stop all the unfounded allegations, PAP! If not, charge Dr Chee in an open court for treason then!
I do find that whatever Chee does is an attempt to politicise the issue even when the issue wasn’t political in the first place.
If he seriously had altruistic reasons, he could have distributed his pamphlets outside the gates of the NTU. Yet he CHOSE to make it a political issue by insisting that he be allowed to do it within NTU itself.
On that basis alone, I agree with NTU’s decision.
There are a lot of Chee sympathisers here but facts are facts. Now I would expect the usual insults will follow.
lim #66
Ain’t NTU students be considered as thinking adults if not intelligent? With minds of their own? No?
Stopping Dr Chee from promoting himself or his party WITHIN the NTU compound is the prerogative of the NTU administators, without doubt.
But stopping students writing about Dr Chee visit, though unauthorised, for their own student newsletter, is simply unbelievable at least if not draconian, would you agree, lim?
lim, you are moving away from this thread subject discussion, sorry to let you know, if you are still not aware of yourself having side tracked from the real discussion issue. Sorry…. mate!
66) lim on September 19th, 2008 4.39 pm
Facts are facts. You are right boy. Funny thing is that there are other people who feel sympathic for Chee. People do process facts differently hoh. Some people may not even have met him personally but people do have a sense to know when someone is not being treated fairly.
“Now I would expect the usual insults will follow.”
Even before it comes, you are already expecting it. It really takes forsight.
Actually, the topic was hijacked by Chee sympathisers.
The main question is whether NTU is justified in asking Chee to leave and censor the news about his visit.
It is the equivalent of whether a person has authority to decide who visits his home.
I find it quite laughable that NTU, exercising its rights, can be portrayed as the “bad guys” here rather than Chee, whose actions have only been to cast doubt on the NTU decision.
The question is not on whether NTU students are intelligent. If they aren’t, they wouldn’t be in university. Indeed, side-tracked is the right words to use.
“Even before it comes, you are already expecting it. It really takes forsight.”
Just based on previous experience on this site rather than foresight.
“but people do have a sense to know when someone is not being treated fairly.”
Y’know, that’s exactly how I feel NTU has been judged in this case. Unfairly.
71) lim on September 19th, 2008 6.47 pm
“Just based on previous experience on this site rather than foresight.”
Well, you are pretty popular here.
“Y’know, that’s exactly how I feel NTU has been judged in this case. Unfairly.”
Really ? Do not worry. The people in NTU are much stronger and ,from the whatever limited information there is from this articles, some students do indeed have their own opinions which are different from how you feel..
Let me explain why I think NTU has been judged unfairly.
Chee created an incident. Yet NTU is expected to support his incident by publishing and promoting it and encourage him further? lol. Only an idiot would do that.
Yet, there are people who would criticise NTU for it. Cos they prefer them to be idiots? lol. I think most Singaporeans are a lot smarter than that.
“Well, you are pretty popular here.”
Chee might be here for the popularity. I’m not.
Some guys online are lost just like those they support…it is sad indeed. Hatred for the sake of hatred, arguments for the sake of arguments…list goes on and on.
Its not unusual for Dr.Chee to garner sympathisers for all his efforts this far-just like a loosing fighter is aroused by ‘fainted-hearted” fans, the whole world felt sorry when Saddam was hanged - they felt he was the good guy and the US was the bad guy. The common man deception of failing to see all past records, failure to read in between lines, investigate etc is the result of a sympathy wave. Its the same here I presume.
Dr Chee’s ambitions are right but going about achieving them are wrong. One got to fight the bull like a matador OR like a clown to draw the bull away from the matador at the laughter of the crowds..Dr Chee got to choose whether he is the matador, the clown, one in the crowd or for the matter the bull!
“Repression, Sir is a habit that grows. I am told it is like making love - it is always easier the second time! The first time there may be pangs of conscience, a sense of guilt. But once embarked on this course with constant repetition you get more and more brazen in the attack. All you have to do is to dissolve organizations and societies and banish and detain the key political workers in these societies. Then miraculously everything is tranquil on the surface. Then an intimidated press and the government-controlled radio together can regularly sing your praises, and slowly and steadily the people are made to forget the evil things that have already been done, or if these things are referred to again they’re conveniently distorted and distorted with impunity, because there will be no opposition to contradict.” - Lee Kuan Yew as an opposition PAP member speaking to David Marshall, Singapore Legislative Assembly, Debates, 4 October 1956
De javu
Facts are facts, no two way about it, that I agreed wholeheartedly! But the question is whether the facts are the truths, that’s totally different ball games. So now, who was the one doing the repression role, may I ask? CSJ? LKY?
So, in the last court encounter between LKY vs CSJ, was it a FACT or LIE that IBA did send a complimentary letter about our country judiciary excellence? Ohhh….. pardon me, it was just an INACCURACY, on the part of LKY, under oath somemore, no less….. my bad….. I’m a naughty boy, I admit. But I no ignorant fool!
Btw, did I insulted the intelligence of NTU students? At least I gave credit to them being thinking students! Disagreed with me, don’t blame me, please blame NTU president Su Guaning, he believed the students still are kids!
Michael (#34):
Credibility starts from working for grassroot causes. In Singapore, working for a student or trade union would be to contribute to government-approved causes and not necessary what the union members are calling for. Using corporate accountability to measure credibility for political accountability is just misguided and out-of-place. To worsen the situation, we have people who not only entrench themselves in public office, but also insulate themselves excessively from the effect of the bad policies they make.
Lim (#66):
The issue here at hand was not NTU’s choice to stop Dr Chee from turning up at NTU again, but rather exercising the right to censor the Nanyang Chronicle. Independent student media does not come cheap and it has a price to pay - it is sponsored by the student union. In the UK, student newspaper are distributed free of charge . The monies for running the newspaper comes from advertisement revenue and a portion of the union membership revenue. NTU’s right can be waivered away as long as the student union takes over the ownership of the Nanyang Chronicle from the university. Then it would not be a case of NTU exercising its right to censor anymore.
“75) V S RAAJ on September 19th, 2008 7.12 pm
“Some guys online are lost just like those they support…it is sad indeed. Hatred for the sake of hatred, arguments for the sake of arguments…list goes on and on.”
Well, don’t you think that you are doing the same.
“Dr Chee’s ambitions are right but going about achieving them are wrong. One got to fight the bull like a matador OR like a clown to draw the bull away from the matador at the laughter of the crowds..Dr Chee got to choose whether he is the matador, the clown, one in the crowd or for the matter the bull!”
Certain people are previleged to play the more enviable part of a Matador. Certain people have to play the part of the clown. Only time will tell whether these roles will start to change side.
Whether Dr Chee has the title of a Matador or Clown is also very much decided by you, me and the populace at large.
“the whole world felt sorry when Saddam was hanged - they felt he was the good guy and the US was the bad guy.”
Well, I did not know that ? The WHOLE WORLD felt sorry when Saddam was hanged. WHOLE WORLD ? Why WHOLE WORLD. Any good reason for the WHOLE WORLD to feel this way.
“The common man deception of failing to see all past records, failure to read in between lines, investigate etc is the result of a sympathy wave. Its the same here I presume.”
Are you very well versed in the affair of the Middle East for you to make such a statement. Surely, the WHOLE WORLD will include a lot of countries like Middle East, Europe and southern Asia. Want to know their stories, speak to those people from those parts of the world and you will get to know how they perceive the US. Singapore has plenty of such people around.
If I remember correctly, few months ago WP chairperson Ms Sylvia Lim was supposed to conduct a speech at one of the lecture halls, but posters of it were removed “mysteriously”. Why PAP can do it, but not WP?
NTU administrators acted in a manner that lacked independence, similar to our judiciary which was reflected in IBA’s report. It has a lot to do with being subservient to this govt. and that in itself is a political issue. This subservient relationship is prevalent in many of our important institutions.
Remember DSP Tay and the cycling fiasco, AG Chan’s twisted logic in favour of the incumbents who were inside the voting premises during elections ?
I propose both institutions do the following.
1) NTU’s management organize a forum for CSJ, JBJ, Chia TP and the PAP. Let the students question both parties to encourage critical thinking.
2) Singapore’s judiciary and Law Ministry organize a forum with IBA and the World Court to show the citizens this govt has integrity.
As a future student of WKWSCI, I am pretty disturbed by this piece of news.
Even before this, I have been playing with the idea of withdrawing from NTU and going to the UK for my tertiary education. This situation just throws more doubts into my mind.
However, I feel it is unfair that WKWSCI and the student journalists are drawing flak from some of you. It is the upper management of NTU - Su Guaning and his cronies who should be lambasted.
I do not blame WKWSCI. As someone mentioned, SCI got thumbed down by the upper management of NTU. I’m sure that more than a few members of the faculty were supportive of the publishing of the article.
I also believe that the student journalists should not take any criticism from us. They are victims of the whole system. Similar to how many at ST are also victims of the media environment in Singapore. Asking the student journalists to stage protests etc. , I believe, is simply asking too much.
Incidentally, I believe CSJ is a clown. Too much bravado, no finesse. Cannot make it.
Hi Donaldson Tan (#77) - Very well said!
=================
I hope we can all give some credit and respect to CSJ and not post too many negative comments here about him. After all, who among us had not benefited from his FREE entertainment at his on expense over the years? How many of us can really do that or have the resources to do that? I wonder.
I don’t know if he has turned into a ‘clown’ as someone here commented, but I wonder what makes him tick?
If you’re a student journalist, your future ricebowl is at stake.
Any attempt to willynilly censor your article is an attack on that rice bowl.
The answer should be pretty clear. Go figure
“Incidentally, I believe CSJ is a clown. Too much bravado, no finesse. Cannot make it.”
You might as well say the whole opposition party community is a clown. WP Party is a clown, Jeyaretnam and Chiam See Tong are a great clowns too ! Why ?because they are fighting for the citizen’s right and Singapore’s future against the mighty elite and self-serving echelon of the ruling party. And they are up against 82 MP along with PAP machinery with many untouchable ministers.
And you forget that PAP is once a clown too since it begin its origin as opposition party with maverick attitudes. Only to demolish the value and principles they once have when they come to power. Their experience as a opposition party give them all the knowledge and skill to prevent other opp party from rising.
But the greatest clown is us because we continue to live in self-denial and think that as long as we can survive, we should be contented with whatever the government policies and rhetoric throw at us. Little do we know that we are just a disposeable manipulatable digit in the eyes of echelon. We don’t even have dignity and back bone like the Burma monks.
Daniel:
No I do not believe that JBJ, Chiam or any of the other Opposition leaders are clowns. CSJ has, IMO, not used his resources well at all. Yes, the local media isn’t doing him any favours, but the way he has gone about engaging the heartlands isn’t too smart. The average Singaporean (older generation at least…) doesn’t take well to ‘kee siao’ displays of bravado and raw energy. He sure doesn’t inspire confidence in me.
And PAP is far from being a clown. As you said, its ‘clownish’ days are over. Now it is Big Brother.
The irony is, in censoring Chee, they have given him even more publicity then a factual and objective news article published in the Nanyang Chronicle would have done. Such an article, which just basically reported what happened, would have not garnered so much attention.
By effecting censorship, this incident has spilled out of NTU, causing the institution embarrassment while giving Chee even more exposure in the public media, which I would believe was Chee’s aim all along. NTU just played into his hands and gave the man a lot of free publicity. Brilliant.
In censoring him, the government has created the impression that it is afraid of Chee as it has something to hide, that it is unable to take criticism, or both. If the government truly believed that his views were not in the best interests of Singapore, why is it afraid that university students, some of the best educated in the country, would be unable to discern likewise? Do they really believe that students are unable to tell fallacious arguments from good ones?
I believe that there is nothing wrong with letting Chee come on campus, as by interacting with Chee in real life, students can form their own opinions of him. By censoring him and keeping him away, we allow people to make him “larger than life”, as all we know of him is what we take in from the media, which I would say do not always give a fair portrayal of the man.
I do not support Chee, but I do believe that it is important that we should know more about him before we make a decision as to whether we dismiss him totally. Dismissing him out of ignorance is a even greater crime, because we are doing the censoring ourselves.
I am a student of WKWSCI, and I would like to say that it is unfair to accuse us of not being objective about this issue. We did our job in covering the incident, but whether it is allowed to go into print is ultimately not our decision. Accusing us of not standing up for our rights is worse, because we did do as such, or there would not be widespread anger over this issue in the student population. If you do not know what happened, please do not be so quick to accuse us.
And finally, for those asking us to shut down the paper, I believe such a reaction would be a knee-jerk one. The Chronicle serves the student community, and shutting it down over such an issue would be out of proportion to the impact of the incident, not to mention a very selfish decision on our part in depriving the student community of a source of information about the happenings in NTU.
Objectivity should be taught to students to aid development in their analytical skills
Mere sliencing of the media would not only stop that development but would in fact make them MORE myopic and ignorant of what is going on around them…
“Yes, the local media isn’t doing him any favours, but the way he has gone about engaging the heartlands isn’t too smart.”
That is why I respect Dr Chee a lot for being a maverick. Been a smart intelligent person, he could have possibly just follow what the rest of opp party do, that is kept low profile, and play by the rules of PAP, and do what the citizens want every opp party to do.
Now is that really smart ? Yes, if one really want to get public approval and likings, one just need to follow the system, but if one really want to advocate changes, one must be daring to voice out happiness and be vocal and act on it. Did Dr Chee ask for riot and violence in protest ? Nope, he just raise pertinent issues and policies that you and I are affected.
The question I ask of other opp parties, what did they really really achieve in their lifetime to liberalise Singapore against self-interest government all this while. The answer is pretty pathetic. Quite sad, the answer is NOTHING. The opp party just voice opinion, comment, debate and then leave the rest to the government and move on. Case closed. Worse, periodically the PAP government downplay the credit of opp party so much, and even use opp party to embarass Dr Chee. We see this time and time, don’t we ? The amount of nonsensical lame excuses of gahmen are getting from bad to worse, and it is insult to hear those words spoken from mouth of ministers. If the ministers and government can’t set a good example, just ask them to take the money and STFU.
You can’t win if you keep succumb to the rule of ruling party because the rules are created just for the purpose of getting advantage. Notice the world has changed but yet the government constantly keep retaining the same old rules when it comes to citizen’s need but keep inventing new rules when it comes to their advantage and squeezing every bit out of citizen.
Now Dr Chee breaks the rule of the game by spread politics awareness in education premise first and that is the strategy, and this is exactly what opp party must do to advocate change. This in turn pressurise the government against complaceny and status quo. Ask police, ask university president for what rule is been broken, and I’m surprise none of them can give keep proper intelligent answer, and the only answer is to follow rule blindly. What kind of education we have here ? Our society has breeded highly educated mindless droid ?
Do you think the Hong Lim Park will be opened up for protest if lesser and nonsensical conditions if Dr Chee and his accomplices did not sacrifice their freedom in the court case against the Lees ? Will you think the IBA will have written the report and create international awareness to pressurise change in accountability and transparency of Singapore government has the Dr Chee and accomplices not engage the Lees ?
Give credit when it is due, other party might have done more work than Dr Chee, but what Dr Chee done so far is far more effective than decades of subservient work done by other party. The result from the sacrifice of Dr Chee and his accomplices speak for itself.
We seem to have forgotten that PAP of today is no longer the PAP that once ruled by competent and patriotic old guards that can inspire the nation. What we have now is just gahmen that just go through the motion, entice by wealth and power. Is that the kind of Singapore you want your children to grow up in ?
“He sure doesn’t inspire confidence in me.”
So which opp party then inspire confidence in you in advocating change for the better ?
Notice how quiet the mainstream media is on this incident.
How come no mainstream media reporter dares to report on this? It’s so easy to do - just go down to NTU and talk to the students.
Has there been an order from “up there” not to report on this incident?
Daniel:
Sadly, there are no Opposition leaders atm who are truly ‘awe-inspiring’. I like Chiam See Tong, but he is getting old.
Maybe this is just my personality. I feel that empty vessels make the most noise and I really do not like seeing all this conflict going on. I’d like to think that we can advocate change without all this big hoo hah and whatnot…as I said, maybe I am still young and am idealistically ignorant. I don’t know.
To me what the opp. needs to do first is to garner the support of the people. By being so ‘garang’ and ’siao on’, coupled with the local media’s unfair portrayal of him, a large majority of the heartlands will be turned off by him. Anecdotal evidence is generally not accepted as a reliable form of evidence, but I can tell you guys that in the case of my parents, they would like nothing better than to see change for the better, from the current state of PAP reign, but even they would rather see continued PAP control instead of having CSJ come into power.
That said, I do recognise those efforts CSJ has made that you mentioned in your post. Same way as I recognise that not everything related to the PAP simply equals ‘bad’, ‘wrong’, ‘unfair’ and ’screwed up’. Just that I don’t think that he is a suitable candidate to lead our country with his over-the-top style.
dmyst:
You said
“I do not support Chee, but I do believe that it is important that we should know more about him before we make a decision as to whether we dismiss him totally. Dismissing him out of ignorance is a even greater crime, because we are doing the censoring ourselves.
I am a student of WKWSCI, and I would like to say that it is unfair to accuse us of not being objective about this issue. We did our job in covering the incident, but whether it is allowed to go into print is ultimately not our decision. Accusing us of not standing up for our rights is worse, because we did do as such, or there would not be widespread anger over this issue in the student population. If you do not know what happened, please do not be so quick to accuse us.
And finally, for those asking us to shut down the paper, I believe such a reaction would be a knee-jerk one. The Chronicle serves the student community, and shutting it down over such an issue would be out of proportion to the impact of the incident, not to mention a very selfish decision on our part in depriving the student community of a source of information about the happenings in NTU.”
I