TOC Exclusive – Agnes Lin: a victim of the ST?
Thursday, 30 October 2008, 12:03 am | 10,586 views
By Choo Zheng Xi
With additional reporting by Terence Lee
Ms Agnes Lin was featured in last week’s Sunday Times in an article entitled “Mom and Dad will provide”. The article was part of a set on how Singaporeans are coping with the recession.
Twenty- year-old Ms Agnes Lin must be Singapore’s most loathed undergraduate, and all thanks to a Sunday Times article that portrayed her as a spoilt brat leeching off her parents to feed her expensive shopping tastes.
But Ms Lin was shocked when she first read the article by Nur Dianah Suhaimi on 26 October. She was made out to be a person intent on indulging in grossly irresponsible shopping habits at her parent’s expense despite the recession, she said to The Online Citizen (TOC).
Giving her side of the story, Ms Lin highlighted important facts that the journalist omitted, and instances where assertions made were only partially true. The portrayal, she said, was so inaccurate that it seems almost to have constructed an alternate persona for her.
“When the piece came out, my friends were calling me and asking me whether I had really said all that. They were shocked because I’m not like that!”
Ms Raudah Begum, her best friend from since Ms Lin’s days in Millenia Institute, could not believe her eyes when she read the Sunday Times.
“Everyone who knows her is shocked. It’s as if they were talking about a totally different person in the article”.
The real Agnes Lin
The piece describes how Miss Lin ‘only uses Shisheido cosmetics and skin care products’, and ‘goes on overseas vacations with her friends where she would bust $1,000 on shopping alone’. The alleged source of her income? According to the article, ‘Mum, a private tutor, and Dad, a businessman selling polythene bags, pay for her expenses’.
Netizens who read the Sunday Times piece were outraged. One blogger fumed: “How she feels about the world is incredibly shallow, I really really need to slap her”. Another wondered: “Does she not understand the notion of being self-sufficient, or that not everyone is as blessed financially as she is?”
But the truth could not be further from the impression created by the ST piece, says Ms Lin.
In fact, contrary to the money-leeching image portrayed in the ST article, she says she actually makes an effort to pay her own way.
While the article claims that she has been receiving a $500 allowance since she was 16, she has in reality stopped taking money from her parents upon beginning her current educational bond programme, which provides her with a monthly salary.
And contrary to the assertion in the article, she pays for her own expenses and bills with this money. While Ms Lin says she took pains to highlight this during her interview with the ST reporter, this fact was omitted in the article.
Is she a lavish jet-setter at her parent’s expense, as the ST piece seemed to suggest?
Agnes has only been on two overseas trips with her friends: once in January this year to Taiwan, and then to Bangkok in July. While her parents helped her defray the cost of her Taiwan trip, she paid for all her expenses to Bangkok herself out of her own savings from a previous relief teaching job and tuition assignments.
Not only does Ms Lin not take money from her parents, she actually makes an effort to earn her own. Before beginning university, Ms Lin gave tuition four times a week to two different children at Punggol and Novena.
According her friends, Ms Lin values frugality. Ms Raudah said, “Agnes is not someone to take money lightly. Sometimes when I see an item I want to buy but is slightly pricey, she will tell me not to waste money on it”.
A twist in the tale?
So is Ms Lin a privileged shopaholic?
The piece claims that ‘twice monthly, she shops at her favourite stores – Topshop, Zara and Forever21’.
Ms Lin says she highlighted to the reporter that she shops less these days as she lives in Nanyang Technological University (NTU) hostel. At one point in our interview, she burst out: “This is hardly the lifestyle of some rich girl lor!”
So what about the claim that Ms Lin ‘carries around the latest mobile phone’?
She is in fact currently using a free Samsung clamshell phone. Her previous phone, a HTC, is spoilt. Since her mom had said ‘no’ to her buying a new phone, she plans to use her Samsung until her 2-year plan is up.
What Agnes felt was most unfair was the ST article’s assertion that ‘She thinks a friend of hers, who is left with $20 to last until the end of the month, is silly to consider taking up a part-time job to earn some extra cash’.
“Anyone reading this would think I’m a spoilt and insensitive brat. I have done part time work myself too! Why in the world would I imply she is silly?”
Based on an extract from her personal blog, the article seemed to put words in her mouth:
“What the reporter asked me was “ Do you have any friends you know facing financial difficulties or are in need to money?”
I said, ” yes, I’ve got a friend who has only 20 dollars left for the month. I told her to ask her parents but she said no because she want to be independent because she is already 20” and should not be asking for her parents for money so often already…so she asked me what’s the fastest way to earn money.”
There was never any mention of the word silly.
The ST’s claim that she planned to get a $4,000 Chanel bag was also wildly distorted, says Ms Lin.
“The reporter asked me what my dream bag was and whether I planned to get it with my first paycheck. I told her that it was a Chanel bag but that I certainly wouldn’t be able to afford it with my first paycheck. Isn’t it common sense that nobody gets paid so much in her first job?”
Ms Lin feels that her words were twisted to fit the story the journalist was trying to write. Looking back, she feels that even the photo she was asked to take was contrived to exaggerte an image of indulgence.
“She initially asked me if her photographer could take a picture of me clubbing. Of course I refused! During the photoshoot, the photographer kept asking me to pose with my branded bag, the only branded item that I have, but I refused”.
The view from the ST
TOC managed to interview ST reporter Nur Dianah and asked why she omitted certain facts in her story.
Explaining why she omitted to mention that Agnes actually pays her own bills, Ms Dianah said that before the interview, Agnes did not want to be identified as being under a tuition bond. She was afraid of infringing her employer’s guidelines on speaking to the press.
Ms Dianah elaborated that if she had written that Ms Lin paid for her own bills, she would then have to explain in the article where Ms Lin got her money from.
“This put me in a quandary. I couldn’t say she was paying her bills through part time work, as her tuition grant guidelines prevent her from moonlighting. I also couldn’t reveal that she was being given an allowance under the tuition bond as she had explicitly asked me not to, so I chose to leave it out”.
Wasn’t it then inaccurate to say that ‘Mum, a private tutor, and Dad, a businessman selling polythene bags, pay for her expenses’?
But, Ms Dianah qualifies that line was not meant to refer to all her expenses.
“In Agnes’ interview, she did mention that when she shops with her mother, her mother usually helps foot the bill.”
Asked if overall she thought the interview was fairly done, Ms Dianah said:
“Definitely. I might have left positive material (about Agnes) out due to space constraints, but there was a lot more information on her that wasn’t flattering which I left out too”.
Does Ms Dianah regret writing the article?
“I certainly regret the distress this has caused her, we never expected this to happen, and we understand this has caused her some trauma. Still, she shouldn’t be worried about what people online are saying about her because a lot of netizens aren’t held accountable and can be quite nasty.”
Damage done
To Ms Lin, the explanations provide cold comfort. Individual facts aside, Ms Lin feels that the article badly misrepresented her, and intentionally so.
“The fact is, the whole article was out to portray me in a bad light, leaving out many important points that would have given a more balanced picture,” she said.
While not wanting to comment on the specifics of this case, media academic Dr Cherian George highlighted the importance of media accountability:
“Increasingly, a more engaged public will judge the professionalism of news media by the level of public accountability that they open themselves to, especially when they make mistakes that hurt relatively powerless individuals and groups. Professional news media should want to progress along these lines, since they say it’s their ethics that distinguish them from mere bloggers.”
Her friend Ms Raudah was more blunt: “I feel that the journalist was intentionally trying to portray her as spoilt. In reality she isn’t like that. She never shows off, she’s a very humble girl.”
Ms Lin was initially depressed at the ST story. So depressed, in fact, she said that “every night I cried to sleep because I didn’t know how to face my parents. I am not someone spoilt and ungrateful, someone who only knows how to ask her parents for money”.
For now, all Ms Lin wants is for her name to be cleared in the court of public opinion, and to put the whole episode behind her.
Special thanks to Mr Clarence Chua for editing assistance.
———
Email this article to a Friend
Bookmark this
Sue the Straits Times on Agnes’ behalf, Zheng Xi.
Hit them where it hurts the most and they’ll think twice about such nonsense next time.
Strange Dejavu. It does look as if there is an emerging trend of writng a story and find interviewees (victims) to fill in the blanks…
Very, very poor by ST. When I read the article I already smelled something fishy.
The whole section about Agnes was blatant sensationalism; reporting to generate ’shock value’ on purpose.
The shock is on ST this time. We’re not all stupid and in the new media age, the sad excuse for a reporter should have anticipated this…kudos to TOC for giving Agnes the chance to air her grievances. The erring reporter should, in SAF terms, hentak kaki. And so should the editor who allowed this to happen.
Very, very poor. I’m very disappointed…
What ST is doing is sick, a gross compromise of journalistic values. To think they once told me ‘be objective’.
I’m sad to see that this has happened.
If Nur Dianah’s side of the story is really as what TOC has reported, then I think that’s really disappointing. I hope she does better next time because she has done some good opinion pieces before this.
I’m glad Agnes is vindicated somewhat. She has taught us all a lesson to be careful what we tell the press, be they the 1st or the 146th.
It’s saddest to think that many media obersvers have resigned to saying ‘this kind of thing happens all the time”. De-sensitisation is a more insidious threat to journalistic values than the distortion of facts itself.
TNP had also wildly twisted their article about the recent NTU protest in Hong Lim: http://chuaclarence.blogspot.com/2008/10/tnp-totally-nonsence-publishing.html
It’s up to civil society to stand up against all this and be responsible watchers of the
mainstream press.
this is not the first time ST hides facts to suit their own agenda. some months ago, a friend of mine wrote an article to ST forum. the article was published, but the content differed greatly from what she had written. she was sadden by this, and has never written to ST since then..
I find Ms Dianah’s comments here quite astounding:
“I certainly regret the distress this has caused her, we never expected this to happen, and we understand this has caused her some trauma. Still, she shouldn’t be worried about what people online are saying about her because a lot of netizens aren’t held accountable and can be quite nasty.”
First she says she “regrets” the distress. Then she fingers netizens as the cause of that distress. She misses the point completely. She is blaming netizens for causing Agnes distress?
Ms Dianah has completely missed the fact that it was her report which is the cause of the distress. Let me re-phrase that: Ms Dianah has completely missed the fact that it was her mis-reporting which is the cause of Agnes’ distress now.
Good lord! Just listen to the tone of Ms Dianah – unapologetic and utterly nonchalant.
It’s sad.
Now, do we believe everything they say about Chee Soon Juan? Or for that matter, about inflation rate, employment rate, national reserves/returns?
Or that our town councils haven’t lost substantially in their investments?
The ST has gone to crap, really. It’s real crappy. All journalists who work for this piece of crap paper should be totally ashamed.
Totally ashamed.
“The ST has gone to crap, really. It’s real crappy. All journalists who work for this piece of crap paper should be totally ashamed.
Totally ashamed.”
I’ll be the first to admit Dianah and ST fouled up big time in Agnes’ case (see my earlier post), but I don’t see the justification of tainting every journo who writes for ST with the same brush. I feel one would be as myopic and short sighted as whomever they are bashing if one was to do so. They should be ashamed of their colleague, yes, and to a lesser extent, ashamed that the paper they work for allowed this to happen…but if you are implying that by association they should be ashamed of themselves and/or for writing for ST then I have to politely disagree. After all, what choice does a budding journalist in Singapore have with regards to employment?
“Wasn’t it then inaccurate to say that ‘Mum, a private tutor, and Dad, a businessman selling polythene bags, pay for her expenses’?
But, Ms Dianah qualifies that line was not meant to refer to all her expenses.”
I am shocked at Ms Dianah’s response. That line is clearly misleading and her response seems to suggest she is quite aware of this as well as the fact that she’s inserting a half-truth into the story. Were we wrong in expecting professionalism?
This is another prime example of the victimization of the innocent by the self-righteous who are too quick to condemn.
Ironically, all netizens on TOC should look themselves in the mirror. I have noticed many here ever ready to demonise someone or something so as to conveniently fit them into their prejudices.
chorus: true, true. The unavoidability of a monopoly — therein lies the danger: Irresponsibility borne of complacency. The journalists there should then be extra wary, at least, about working under an editor who allows such fabrication to pass. And they should be on their own guard against this seeming modus operandi of their newspaper. They owe it to their individual interviewees, and larger society.
“The ST has gone to crap, really. It’s real crappy. All journalists who work for this piece of crap paper should be totally ashamed.”
Not really, ShittyTimes can be quite credible if you just reverse what they say…
Caveat Emptor.
it’s Interviewee beware !
smallvoice:
“This is another prime example of the victimization of the innocent by the self-righteous who are too quick to condemn.
Ironically, all netizens on TOC should look themselves in the mirror. I have noticed many here ever ready to demonise someone or something so as to conveniently fit them into their prejudices.”
Well said mate. I share similar sentiments. I’m not one for bashing for the sake of bashing. Ironically, they become as short sighted and illogical as those they so eagerly condemn…funny isn’t it? Where ‘bashing’ is clearly called for, though, such as Agnes’ case here, I have no qualms.
Do not let this put you off TOC though. There are many intelligent posters whose posts have enriched me. And isn’t it what we’re here for anyway, to read alternative views? =)
Clar:
“chorus: true, true. The unavoidability of a monopoly — therein lies the danger: Irresponsibility borne of complacency. The journalists there should then be extra wary, at least, about working under an editor who allows such fabrication to pass. And they should be on their own guard against this seeming modus operandi of their newspaper. They owe it to their individual interviewees, and larger society.”
True. As someone for whom journalism is being seriously considered as a future career, I have debated with myself over the whole ‘media in singapore-is it worth it?’ issue. Given the restrictive environment, why am I still considering journalism in Singapore when I can save myself the stress, long hours, slamming from netizens by choosing, say, Business? The answer (so far) is that besides my penchant for writing, is that my heart lies with Singapore.
I’d like to think that a fair share of ST or local journos are in it because they love journalism and they love reporting, be it local news, finance, sports etc. and not like what so many cynics decry them to be – PAP lackeys, govt lapdogs etc.
Oops. Sorry for detracting from the main topic of poor Agnes. =x
Agnes needs to demand an apology from the ST that is published in the paper.
Not a small section hidden at the bottom of a random page saying “Errors we made. We are sorry”
But a full page saying “SORRY FOR OUR SHITTY ASS EXCUSE FOR JOURNALISTIC STANDARDS” in big f*** you letters.
Someone needs to take them to task. And the reporter sounds like a fool — same kind of idiotic rhetoric that certain ministers like to spout. Just because you say something doesn’t make it true, no matter how earnestly you say it.
Comments edited by moderator.
“Sue the Straits Times on Agnes’ behalf, Zheng Xi.
Hit them where it hurts the most and they’ll think twice about such nonsense next time.”
Indeed. Our courts have developed such robust defamations laws over the years that it should be easy to obtain damages if Agnes was really portrayed inaccurately and suffered harm to her reputation as a result.
How news got its information and how it reports it is of public interest. The public are the receiver of information. We must receive facts.
We need more Transparency.
Or shall I use the word Translucency ? Translucency is an old word , now I like to give it a new meaning. I prefer to use this term because to me Transparency means FULL Transparency and Full transparency only.
Is Translucency a better and more appropriate word to use ?
I hope not we no need to use the word Opalescency.
““I certainly regret the distress this has caused her, we never expected this to happen, and we understand this has caused her some trauma. Still, she shouldn’t be worried about what people online are saying about her because a lot of netizens aren’t held accountable and can be quite nasty.””
I couldn’t help but notice how this ST journo pulls the “netizens are unaccountable” card so quickly, it seems almost a reflex action. Gotta admire such solidarity.
I cannot say I am terribly ~surprised~ at this news, The same thing happened a few years back with the ST’s coverage on the Angus Ross prize winner who didn’t read books. It seems they have a special talent for summarising people in the most bizarre ways, all in the name of space constraint. Such glorious journalism.
Again I like to bring up words of a former ST editor (Lesile Fong) talking about their reporters:
http://www.pressclub.org.sg/topic_more.php?id=1356_0_17_0_M
Too true. But then again, this happens all the time. Misrepresentation is not a new thing, and never going to be something too.
I’m curious as to the choice of giving an article on Agnes Lin as well as what is TOC trying to bring across here.
I remember there was a play critics from shittytimes who left the play in 10 minutes and then wrote a whole load of BS bad review about the play.
I suppose shittytimes hires a lot of such fiction writers to fill up the pages……….
Just like some of the chua and li and hong and whatever…….
Strange as it may sound, my wife and l don’t buy, subscribe or read the hard copy of the Strait Times or even any magazine periodicals.
We made a joint decision to read only online news from a variety of sources with the broadband internet that we subscribe to.
It was a decision that has enriched us in more ways than one. [smile!]
We have truly gone paperless . . . . saved the trees . . . . and the environment and even saved on subscription!
TOC – Thank you for doing a corrective journalistic surgery on the life and times of Agnes Lin.
As far as I know, the “netizens” (at least on the Xtralicious blog) who criticized Ms Lin based on the article have apologized in follow-up comments after discovering the latter had been misrepresented.
The comment on essentially ignoring “netizens” is rather disingenuous on the part of that ST reporter. Then again, given she ignores anything written by bloggers, she’d hardly have been in a position to know the truth now, would she?
Since when Sunday Times has degenerated into tabloid?
I thought it was meant to be a family read.
Things seem to get worse and worse in Singapore.
Demand a public apology from the reporter. Libel. No hiding behind the cloak of journalistic editing. The same crap excuse is probably used when reporting other local news, I suppose.
If this is true, I sympathize with Ms Lin. As per my blog update, my grouse is with the alleged behaviour and not with her per se.
When Zheng Xi first showed me the article, we both thought that it was extremely questionable behaviour. Honestly, I never thought that ST would stoop to such a deplorable low.
I am quite appalled.
Makes one question if we can trust anything we read these days.
So from now on, we should be careful when the ST say how good our ministers are or how bad the opposition is. Best is to use our own eyes to see, head to think and heart to feel; and watch out for the political motivation.
When the media approaches you, always be very, very careful in what you say as it can be twisted out of context. Insist on receiving a copy first of what they intend to send out.
If its god enough for LKY to sue when a paper defames him then Agnes should do the same. The paper misrepresented the truth and fabricated things she said, this is clearly defamation under Singapore Law and she should be compensated through the courts to clear her name.
If the law protects our leaders then it must also hold that it protects the people.
I hope TOC no longer quotes the local MSM as evidence of the truth.
Which will be a problem I have to admit.
If the original article was bad, this is totally unapologetic ” … but there was a lot more information on her that wasn’t flattering which I left out too”. So we are left to wonder how Agnes is in fact much worse than portrayed in the article ….
Very irresponsible behaviour indeed. Shame.
I’d like to share my story.
A few months back, my boss, who heads the reading club in the company where we work, asked me if I could be interviewed by ST for an article about reading in Singapore. It was the national ‘Read Singapore’ drive to promote reading. I said ok, why not? I was to regret this later.
What happened next was, I then received a phone call from a ST journalist who asked more than a dozen questions seeking my opinion on reading in Singapore, the young, the old, their reading habits etc. Following that I had to answer a set of questions in writing, providing my opinion to a list of questions similar to those I had been asked over the phone and more. In all, I think I answered no less that 2 dozen questions.
Next, the journalist asked for a photo of myself so that she could publish it together with the article she was writing. I did not have any photo of myself at that time and I told her I could not provide her my photo. My boss suggested to her a group photo taken at one of our reading exchanges be provided instead. It was accepted together with another 2 or three photos of some of the group members.
When the article was published, I had the shock of my life! The journalist wrote her piece based on what she thinks about the Read Singapore initiatives. A bit of space was given to the interview she had with my boss.
As for me, there was only one line with one quote from the list of questions I answered. I can understand and accept this. I guess it’s the only quote that fits into what she had already targeted to convey to her audience. Oh yes; and; space constraints.
What shocked me most was the picture that was used. It was a photo of one of the book club members.
It identified me with that photo.
Agnes Lin should write to the ST to bring her side of the story to the public. This one-sided reporting is unacceptable. The misrepresentation is perceived by all readers of the Sunday Times who read the article, not only those who shared their views on the Net. Given that, the clearing of the air should rightly be done on the paper that carried the original article, not on the Net.
Shocking. Absolutely shocking.
But then again, why am I not surprised, after all this is the same media that claims to be objective but while being the mouthpiece of the PAP government.
Thankfully, my journalism friends currently in college has vowed never to work for ST as they feel it compromises their journalistic integrity.
Let’s assume this ST journalist’s article is part of a larger pattern and try to interpret, in that context, what she just might be trying to put across here:
Direct Translation: The “younger generation” of Singaporeans are all decadent and financially irresponsible, compared to their more down-to-earth, practical and hardworking forebears.
Final Implications: Naturally, this means that “their” political values are also decadent and irresponsible. “Their” want for more openness in political debate, for example, should be understood as a manifestation of this latent irresponsibility and overweening concern with being “trendy”.
I don’t think this is a stretch, given that the PM and MM often seem to try to characterize politically liberal values as things that belong primarily to the so-called “younger generation”. Which is really quite a straw man.
Ms Dianah elaborated that if she had written that Ms Lin paid for her own bills, she would then have to explain in the article where Ms Lin got her money from.
“This put me in a quandary. I couldn’t say she was paying her bills through part time work, as her tuition grant guidelines prevent her from moonlighting. I also couldn’t reveal that she was being given an allowance under the tuition bond as she had explicitly asked me not to, so I chose to leave it out”.
She has some point in this argument. Indeed, she may have some trouble writing where the money comes from. Her mentioning of parents paying for expenses may be a way to bypass this problem, but it sadly implied in the readers’ mind that all the expenses came from her parents.
And on the same issue, is it really true that Agnes can, in principle, get into trouble for revealing her source of income, or more specifically, that she’s working part time while receiving tuition grants at the same time?
If so, this will generate some trouble for her in clearing her name, since if she raises the issue publicly, then she might find herself in trouble (albeit to a lesser degree) as well.
can the girl sue straits times? like minister sue opposition.
i think not easy also. last time that nkf guy want to sue straits times he lost everything.
i think lawyers do not dare to take up the case also.
/// 1) inspir3d on October 30th, 2008 12.11 am
Sue the Straits Times on Agnes’ behalf, Zheng Xi. ///
Never, never, never sue someone who buys ink by the barrels…
Unless you have very, very, very deep pockets, or thunder god behind you…
Seriously, I would like to know from the reporter what’s her objective of putting up that article about Agnes?
I am sure it’s not just done to take up some space.
If it’s about finding a picture to fit the written article, she could look elsewhere lah, especially those with elite uncaring face types … I am sure Singapore has many.
This one backfired.
Disclaimer: I do not know whose right and whose wrong. But base on the questions asked by TOC to the Reporter Ms Dianah and the Answers from the Reporter, it sincerely seems that Reporter has seriously misquoted, misled, hidden facts to protray a different story. Thus i think Agnes Lin can sue.
So currently i support Agnes base on the information that is available.
Additionally
“I certainly regret the distress this has caused her, we never expected this to happen, and we understand this has caused her some trauma. Still, she shouldn’t be worried about what people online are saying about her because a lot of netizens aren’t held accountable and can be quite nasty.”
She slams Netizens also. Arghzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Fatal mistake when she herself said
“We never expect this to happen”
What did she mean?
Did she mean that pple reading this article won’t think that Agnes is
- Selfish
- Immature
- Lack of knowledge on current happenings
- Stupid
- Etc, etc, etc, etc and many other negative descriptions
Disclaimer: I’m not flaming Agnes, above is just a simple example of things tat ve been said about Agnes before TOC’s interview with ST Reporter.
So Ms Dianah is saying that she didn’t think her article will start the cruxification of Agnes? Especially in this current time when Reccession may be around the corner and the Mini Bonds issue, she writes a article about a spoiled brat with too much money?
“We never expect this to happen”
This statement makes me feel that Reporter is expected to Write but not Read their own articles and Feel the outcome. And since she said
“netizens aren’t held accountable”
Should she then be accountable for not providing FULL information which lead to the Near Cruixfication of Agnes? (I wonder whether Agnes stayed home fearing for her life since the article since some pple suggested robbing her)
And her boss, should her boss be held accountable for such a Mis Directing Article to be published? (I do not know the chain of command in ST, but surely a article will go through a few pple before being published?)
Message to Agnes:
I guess, it was just a stroke of bad luck. Thankfully, TOC helped to publish more information. Am touched and glad tat you belong to a group of young pple who strive to provide for themselves. This group is sincerely lacking now, but thankfully growing.
PS: Base on the the current information, i’m on ur side. =D
To TOC:
Good Luck on checking out the facts. Else the pple would ve taken ST’s words and labeled Agnes and then she will be GG liao (Good Game)
Hope that in future will ve more of this sort of articles for Netizens who are not Accountable to tear apart.
http://informationreadbyme.blogspot.com/2008/10/great-job-st.html
This kind of rubbish articles should not be published in the first place. Does it have a positive impact to the society? No.
If someone wishes to write about a person, please, leave out the elite, uncaring implied sarcasms which may or may not be true.
But its okay – I’ve condemned this publication eons ago anyway.
even if shes earning a bit, i dont think a person her age should be spending like that.
Hi Inspir3d,
Yes, actually it’s my personal opinion that the piece could be potentially defamatory. I’m not sure Agnes wants to sue though, she’s just happy it’s all over now.
Hi Mr Kit,
The point is, she doesn’t.
I applaud the reporter! Her bosses should promote her ASAP to chief editor. She has demonstrated a flair for inaccuracy, misleading readers, deceit, biasness, and fiction writing. Laudable journalistic values that the “nation-building” press always supports and is proud of. A big clap to NTU’s school of communications too, if indeed she hails from such a fine faculty.
“This put me in a quandary. I couldn’t say she was paying her bills through part time work, as her tuition grant guidelines prevent her from moonlighting. I also couldn’t reveal that she was being given an allowance under the tuition bond as she had explicitly asked me not to, so I chose to leave it out”.
Erm… then maybe the journalist should have found another source? I mean, if you want to find ’self-indulgent’ youngsters who are fiscally irresponsible, it should be quite easy to find right? Just got to the street and start asking questions! That what we did when we were doing our journalism course in Uni! I mean, the journalist is the sister of Agnes’ friend. That’s just convenient and lazy journalism.
The thing is, this whole article is pure agenda setting! I could see the editor going ‘ok, we need a story on the different reactions to the recession between the young and the old. For more drama, let’s make the young people less worried. Hey, maybe find one who is just purely irresponsible, and then contrast it with you know, the young working adult, and the thrifty middle-aged man etc’
Society Progress will be very slow as long as there is so many oblivious to what is going on in the society and not talking about issues affecting all of us. Some characterise singaporeans as APATHETIC. I fully agree. This does no good to ourselves.
Looking at all TOC articles, which I like very much,
I feel sad.
Sad because the view count is so small, about 1000+ on average.
What does 1000 views mean? To me, it means less than 1000 persons have views each article on average. Even less posted comments to express how they feel. A person who posted tend to revisit the article comments section to see replies thus adding to the view count.
Ladies and gentlemen, can you tell me that Progress will not be slow?
On my part, I contribute by informing anyone i know about this blog and advise them that “posting a comment is better than doing absolutely nothing. Collectively, a momentum can be generated to cure APATHY forever”.
yours,
Take and Spend no need accounts.
[...] Press rank 141 and falling | The Misquoting of Agnes Lin? – TOC: TOC Exclusive – Agnes Lin: a victim of the ST? – The Lycan Times 狼人時報: Daily Discourse – Agnes [...]
154th,
Dianah is indeed from NTU’s School of Communication. But your extrapolation that WKWSCI breeds the traits of “inaccuracy, misleading readers, deceit, biasness, and fiction writing” is a fallacious argument .
Saying bad journalistic values present in a reporter comes directly from their school of training is a simplistic world view, as if Dianah exists in a social and media vacuum.
Secondly, one bad apple doesn’t spoil the whole bunch. If Dianah has gone wayward, that’s her fault, and maybe that of the ST environment she works in.
I was misquoted by the Straits Times in an article during the property boom about developments in the Beach Road area, earlier this year.
The journo specifically asked me whether I’d consider investing in property there – to which I said “No, the property rates are overvalued, I’d never consider investing at these prices in this area.”
Lo and behold, my clear ‘no’ turned into an unequivocal ‘yes’ in order to align with the silly Straits Times euphoria. I’ve heard others have the same experience. They probably do this all the time – decide what the news is, then look for quotes to fill in the blanks.
Clarence,
As an alunmi of WKWSCI, I can say that the faculty attempts to teach responsible journalism. But you are right to say the environment at ST might have played a part. It is actually quite discouraging for journalists who frequently find their hands tied by the superiors and editors. Lastly, how can you take the paper seriously when the Editors of the Political desk are former ISD agents who have no background in journalism at all?
I’m a graduate of the school too. hi! (i don’t take the paper seriously; neither will I ever join it).
i’m not surprised. it only confirms my observations + personal experience.
sometimes, it all boils down to “nation-building” at the expense of credibility.
sad!
[...] The Online Citizen has done a follow-up interview with Agnes for her side of the story, which paints a whole different picture. The interview can be found here. [...]
Maybe someone who knows the ***** should write a story on the ***** who wrote the story on Agnes. Has she been taught professionalism? Highly unlikely. The ***** is reporting the story totally out of context, making the story totally distorted and she thinks -
Does Ms Dianah regret writing the article?
“I certainly regret the distress this has caused her, we never expected this to happen, and we understand this has caused her some trauma. Still, she shouldn’t be worried about what people online are saying about her because a lot of netizens aren’t held accountable and can be quite nasty.”
I don’t see any ounce of regret in her response. The ***** is refering to netizens being nasty and unaccountable? Look who is talking here. Writing an article as such, and if totally true will enlist such comments from people who naively believe in her story – she never expects this? She has to be held responsible for this reaction – to her untrue potrayal by writing it out of context. This however seems to be the ST type of news reporting. We have seen this before as indicated in one of the comments earlier – “a flair for inaccuracy, misleading readers, deceit, biasness, and fiction writing”
Netizens should be aware that in general most of the stories in the Straits Times are either, censored, written out of context, and discount the accurateness by 90% before reacting to such news.
LPPL writes that Agnes should write to the ST for clarification to be printed on ST and not the net? Is he/she kidding? and get the clarification misrepresented again? Is LPPL believing that the ST will do this? Not in a million years!!
It is also interesting perhaps to understand where the ***** is coming from? How long has she been writing for the ST? How long has she been writing? Who has been her teacher? Bad journalistic values present in a reporter comes in part from their school of training where values and professionlism are supposed to have been taught? the other influence can be attributed to the ***** being in ST period.
Sue the ST – look at how the trials is going in the kangoroo courts, you will have to think twice.
Comments edited by moderator.
Hi Soojenn,
We understand the anger you feel at what has gone on. Actually, I feel it very strongly too.
However, it’s probably getting unneccesarily personal to insult the journalist too personally. Just to put you on notice that we will shortly be moderating your comment to take out some of the most hurtful words, while trying to preserve the sentiment conveyed in your comment.
Regards,
Zheng Xi
My bro-in-law read the ST article to me on Sunday and we both laughed at how disconnected and far-removed the person was (according to the report). And after reading about it here, I thought perhaps some serious misrepresentation had taken place – something not beyond ST, in my opinion.
However, after visiting the interviewee’s website, I find that it may not have been as dramatic as it seems. From the previous posts, it seems that the interviewee does go (expensive) shopping often and leads a relatively worry-free lifestyle.
Therefore, putting both sides (reporter and interviewee) in a neutral perspective, I believe the interviewee has a ‘more fortunate’ life as compared to the average Singaporean, and naturally leans towards being spoilt. This probably was the prerequisite for the reporter to choose her as the interviewee, and the reporter conveniently structured the interview to solicit the answers and responses she needed to fit her story.
All in all, the spoilt little reasonably-rich girl was unfairly portrayed as a totally ridiculous spoilt little rich girl. I would say ‘disgust towards the questionable ethics of the reporter’ would be a more appropriate response as compared to ‘outrage’.
I advise all to read through her blog to the earlier entries to get a better feel of who the interviewee really is. The best friend quoted by TOC may also be similarly fortunate as the interviewee and her comments should be considered within this context as well – to Bill Gates, FaceBook may be ’slightly pricey’ but for me, Starbucks is already ’slightly pricey’…
The journalist is just a journalist.
If she writes something unsuitable, it does not get published, in almost any other circumstances. She will learn what is publishable and what is not – from the editors, and not the public. There are waste baskets in every newsroom, but we are not sure about how the ones at The Sunday Times office in the News Centre is used.
How the article gets pass the editors to the readers shows how much discretion the persons in charge at that newspaper think.
The editor should resign. And the newspaper should offer an apology to the aggrieved interviewee and its readers for unsuitable content.
Dear Agnes,
Learn from such experience – in life you will have to deal with all kinds. Also learn to forgive. Sometimes things are not as intentional as they are made up to be. Netizens are also normal people too.
Move on and be strong – communicate with your parents.
Life must go on, go out , and take good care of yourself.
okay okay i think it’s time people cool it.
the irony lies in the fact that while the ST article in question obviously portrayed Ms Lin in an unfairly unfavorable light, this TOC article may have crossed the line as well by not portraying both sides of the coin – in fact it, as well as the numerous comments here [barring the minority] have demonized the reporter in return, which I feel is equally unfair. The response from the reporter seems to have been tainted by the personal biases of the people who commented, and the slant of the article itself, is to me, unjustified, though it is human for Ms Lin to assert that the article was trying to portray her in a bad light – she has suffered a lot of trauma.
As a person who holds rationality and objectivity as virtues above all others in the media, perhaps the article should have been double-checked to ensure that such ‘perceptions’ were not aired because, yes, I agree, they cause massive damage when published, and netizens should not be fully blamed for such a negative response [though admittedly a fair number of netizens are impulsive], but we should be asserting that the reporter intentionally wrote that article that way without clarifying from her objectively and sticking to the facts. This, I believe, is in return a gross misinterpretation of the reporter’s stance.
We are being biased against the reporter and in turn the establishment [Straits Times] because we are allowing our prejudices and emotions to control our thinking. We jump at the nearest opportunity to criticize and lambast them for their mistakes. I fully agree that they should apologize for any inconvenience caused to Ms Lin, but the suggestions to sue or allege that there was mischief intended is regrettable, troublesome, and can lead to counter-suing.
A mistake in reporting has been committed, let the apology be said, but let it end there. The damage has been done, the best way to rectify it is to say sorry and learn. There is no need in insinuating assertions against the ST in return. While I do empathise with the ‘victim’ here, we as netizens know the truth about her now, so there is no need to take further action if we cannot conclusively prove that the reporter had malicious intentions, because on the whole ST’s news is pretty credible, and to jump to conclusions about the reporter would be committing the same crime that we have set out against.
While I agree that the journalist probably had no malicious intent other than get the stories the editor wants her to, I guess people are pretty angry at her because of her profession and what people expect of someone in her profession. Mis-representing facts to fit the story angle is not ethical.
If the subject does not fit the angle, then find someone else who does. And if you can’t find that subject, perhaps then the story angle should be dropped.
Personally, having come from the same faculty as the journalist where journalism ethics is one of the subjects you learn, I find it disappointing that such a lapse in judgement occured. But then again, journalists are humans too, that’s why they make mistakes. And to be honest, I won’t like to work under the kind of pressure and deadlines they have. Unless, of course, I am one of the Chua sisters. But that is something best left for another discussion.
Well you want the truth, read the ST. Recently a private school, Boston Business School was quoted wrongly as offering dodgy degrees. The next day, there was a small print correction, when the damage had already been done. Poor school, noway to sue and win against the big boys.
It’s an honest mistake, lets move on.
Lets stop wasting monies on fictional news.
It’s not an honest mistake. It’s a systemic problem the Straits Times has. Everything is secondary to the need to promote ‘nation building’ – there’s an editorial line for most things, and the facts have to be marshalled in favour of that line.
The hypocrisy of (many but not all) ST journos makes me sick.
Clarence
“I’m a graduate of the school too. hi! (i don’t take the paper seriously; neither will I ever join it).”
Hi probable future senior =D
As a probable future student of WKWSCI, I’m curious to know what you do for a living if you’re not in ST (assuming you majored in journ)
brick,
if that’s the way newspapers are supposed to be run, then i supposed that a large number of editors from the so called reputable newspapers should have resigned many times over.
I bring to my point earlier, if this was a case of victimization by ST, then i failed to see how a particular case of misrepresentation or error illustrate a systematic tendecy of ST to twist facts, or how ST on a whole has failed to provide accurate reports, much less an agenda of ST to specifically target Ms Agnes Lin.
News are after all representations, therefore it is important that the reader spots the agenda beneath. The state of news in our country has never been agenda free, lets not all forget that.
@Laserpointer
If this was the only instance, it wouldn’t be particularly noteworthy. The fact that I know three ST journos and they freely admit to interviewing their friends and friends-of-friend to supplying whatever quotes are required is … dare I say … ’systemic’. Their actions could be isolated – but the more likely explanation is that this is a reflection of the culture of self-censorship that exists there.
Couple with the fact that I know three people, myself included, who have all been misquoted in order to further the general thrust of the article we were quoted in … and we are beyond journalism and into propaganda.
You may think that Singaporeans should acquiesce in this because “the state of news in our country has never been agenda free” . But individual freedom is not safeguarded when dominant media channels preclude the reporting of inconvenient truths.
Another CRAP reporter from Shitty Times, i really wonder how they get this type of journalist to work in ST, is it under the table? To me most ST reporters/writers/editors cannot make the mark locally, cant figure out how they will fare in international standings ranked with North Korea?
laserpointer (#68):
“if that’s the way newspapers are supposed to be run, then i supposed that a large number of editors from the so called reputable newspapers should have resigned many times over.”
it’s a very sad truth. tabloid sensationalize news in order to sell. but 2 wrongs don’t make a right. if the article is published in TNP, readers knows that it’s a tabloid, thus less influence by the reporting. it’s unacceptable for ST to suppress facts to fulfill its own agenda.
“News are after all representations, therefore it is important that the reader spots the agenda beneath. The state of news in our country has never been agenda free, lets not all forget that.”
agreed, it’s important to spot the agenda beneath. but how many wary eyes are able spot the agenda? so should we blame the unwary readers for being misled or the paper for wilfully suppressing the truth and choose what they want to report to suit their agenda?
When I was in Germany, I watched a BBC program which shows Singaporeans overseas commenting on the integrity of the current leadership here. Not something flattering and will be utterly censored here. Although we cannot doubt the pioneering leaders have sculpted a splendid economic spectacle over the past few decades, I cannot deny that I feel the leadership have decayed. Correct me if I am wrong but I think that many organisations merely work to the twisted agenda of bootlicking the upper management. And many times played on biased leverage against their competitors. Even to the extend of using underhanded tactics. And naturally, these organisations will dispute such claims when challenged.
The local media have never been my choice of information consolidation. It is either the BBC or DWTV over the internet. But of course, when I am overseas, I will tune into the television.
The ST reporter may have “victimised” Agnes, but she did portray, through Agnes, a generation who are more free spending than the older ones.. I mean, how can you consider a student who brings a $2000 hangbag to school, holidaying in Taiwan and Bankok (with friends), busting $1000 on shopping alone “frugal”?
While I have no idea how much she earns from her bond or her teaching stints, I doubt very much the amount is sufficient to sustain her lifestyle–without additional financial support from her parents.
<<>>
Nah. Don’t bother suing the ST. They have loads of money to pay for million-dollar lawyers to fight for them. Lee & Lee only got $600,000 between them for damages. How much do you think our dear girl’s reputation is worth? That’s how they’re gonna fight. [ As an aside, Lee & Lee should've gotten nothing because the man in the street don't believe what's been said about them and/or very few people actually do take in what's been asserted by the Dr and his party in whatever leaflets that had been printed on, hence No Damages, that's the law of damages. Damage must be proven.]
73) The People’s on October 30th, 2008 9.40 pm
…………………
The local media have never been my choice of information consolidation. It is either the BBC or DWTV over the internet. But of course, when I am overseas, I will tune into the television. …………..
—————————————————————————-
Actually, there is not many source of news about singapore to choose from right? CNA . So, ya, no choice, have to tune in when overseas to it. What to do? Its happened, lets close ranks and move on.
Hi ddfb1993,
That’s why we gave the ST reporter ample an opportunity to explain herself in the report.
Hi passerby,
Actually the handbag was a gift Agnes’ her mother, and she does not bring it to school to show off. She never told the ST journalist that she spent $1,000 in Bangkok.
Regards,
Zheng Xi
68) Chorus
As a probable future student of WKWSCI, I’m curious to know what you do for a living if you’re not in ST (assuming you majored in journ)
You’d do good to come to this school! People like Cherian George are not to be missed:)
I’m working in a magazine house now (Not SPH magazines!:). I like the pace and the environment of mags. Being in this industry really opens many more possibilities to work in than just joining the national broadsheet: I have a friend working in a Japanese bank, some are in radio, others are with TODAY, freelance photographers, videographers, advertising, etc. Ok this sounds very advert
Back to the topic, I think we should hit up ST Forum with our views, constructive criticism even, just to see if, how much, and how accurately they publish non-laudatory comments.
Obviously the reporter already had an ulterior motive to carry the story with a certain angle , probably along the line of showing up big spending etc. Since Nur Diana found out during the interview that Agnes’ story will not jive with her tack, she should not have continued with the story abt her. That she had done so, goes to show that Nur is a very uncrupulous, unethical, unprofessional and totally unconscionable and poorly trained reporter. And that she had preferred to twist and distort the story so as to meet the deadline! Pathetic!
There was no way Dianah, whether she felt it or not, would have said sorry. Saying sorry opens up the possibility of litigation since it is an admission of guilt. This is basic PR stuff. Come on.
Also ST is quite well-known as a stressful, strait-laced place.
They’re mostly nice guys, and it’s a reasonably decent paper about everything except certain topics. Of course they’re shit if you compare them to the likes of BBC or National Geographic… but I think they hold up pretty well compared to wires (like some of shit they pulled in Iraq, esp the one where a photog outright faked photographs), the broadcasters and online hellholes like FreeRepublic.
But I wouldn’t want to work there.
@English Truth
I agree with you on that, but my point earlier was more on victimization vs misrepresentation. As for the “systematic misrepresentation” part, if that’s the point that this article wants to bring out, then i’m afraid it’s a little too far stretch to suggest that, including your point on inconvenient truths. I tend to believe too, that it’s a problem of having too few media channels, rather than a problem of irresponsible reporting. The thing is that ST has never been, or has never will be agenda-free.
@brick
no and no, this isn’t a blame game on whose responsibility it is. The keyword is “supposed” to be, the media is supposed to be value, agenda free and takes the objective view on all things, which i think in reality hardly happens or has never happened. In times like this, it’s of course a good thing to be discerning including on this site, and yes that doesn’t mean we should strive for the ideal of “objective” reporting.
Quote:
12) smallvoice585 on October 30th, 2008 1.14 am
This is another prime example of the victimization of the innocent by the self-righteous who are too quick to condemn.
Ironically, all netizens on TOC should look themselves in the mirror. I have noticed many here ever ready to demonise someone or something so as to conveniently fit them into their prejudices. Unquote.
To “smallvoice585″
By your comment, are you not also self-righteous?
By your comment, are you not also ever-ready to demonise ALL NETIZENS on TOC so as to conveniently fit them into YOUR prejudices?
Lesson to be learnt about this incident :
Ask
1. Do you EVER Question the information fed to you ?
2. How many sources of information do you get for each news eg. how many support a hike?
3. Does it mean that whatever is written in news is to be accepted totally, completely, unquestioningly?
Use your blain!
Dianah
Ever thgt of becoming a lawyer. Yr attempt to quibble over absence of “all” shows you got aptitude.
As to ethical values, you are in the best traditions of the legal profession.
Got one question? Why someone like you still in SPH?
Thgt they got high professional standards.
@ Propaganda Translucency
If you pay money for what purports to be a quality product, and yet it consistently isn’t, then you should stop buying the product. Except of course if you’re in Singapore and want to be kept abreast of what’s going on in the community, then there’s limited choice.
However that doesn’t bar customers from criticising the service provider for poor standards. All the more when the service provider bleats on about it’s high standards, and how it tries to position itself as the ‘open commons’ of local debate.
There are good people at ST; and there are unpleasant people there too. Sadly the unpleasant ones are in charge.
Yes, I realise it’s should have been its.
so any legal expert here know can people sue the straits times when this type of things happen?
or is it got money can sue already?
82) Sweeping Statements
clap….clap……clap……clap…….well said.
Moral of the story
If SPH reporter wants to inverview you, ask her or him what person thinks about Dianah’s behaviour. If they defend or support Dianah, better not continue to talking.
Kannah sabo like this poor gal.
If the SPH is not up to what you are looking for? The following link can be an excellent alternative. Communicate with proper English, get better recognition worldwide as you get in tuned with a broader and democratic news network. Censored infomation locally may be picked up here.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/default.stm
Read how BBC describes Singapore
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/country_profiles/1143240.stm
Heard somewhere that if the journo’s article doesn’t get published – it will reflect badly on their performance reviews and be asked to leave once they hit a certain number of rejected articles.
Not sure how true this is – but perhaps it drives journos to sensationalise things to keep their jobs.
Feel free to use the phrase “No Comments” whenever you meet the media next time =)
Well I agree with the journalist on one thing – netizens are not held accountable by what they say. Fantastic!
I can pose as Obama now, God tomorrow, Joe the Plumber next week, Tan Kin Lian yesterday! I don’t have to be held accountable by my words here. I get away scot free! I can call myself any name I want.
I can do the same amount of damage as ST, or even more if I flame a real person, spread a wild rumour on forums/blogs. My flaming could spread to millions of people, in virtual space, or the REAL world in a matter of minutes, and may cause stock markets to crash! I can pretend to be someone’s spouse and have a fling under that name, and cause trouble in a marriage. I could do so much to cause hell.
Isn’t new media WUNDERFUL?! ;p
To say “no comments” to a journalist is doing a great disservice to those reporters who ARE ethical. While we should criticise journalists and their articles, we must remember that reporters have to face the daily grinds and the rigourous demands of meeting deadlines. It is not easy.
Cut the reporters some slack. For every one misquote, there must be ten others that are accurate.
Should you be interviewed by a reporter next time, just be careful in what you say, speak slowly, and demand that reporter calls you to check the quote with you. If he or she doesn’t call, make sure you have her mobile phone number.
Quote Terence.
hmmm I find that quite weird of you to say ” cut the reporter some slack”
the damage she has caused is far worse than what she has to handle everyday.
before working for ST she should have known the work stress she has to handle.
if its so taxing on her, then kindly quit the job and go for an easier way out.
sheesh
hey i know you all feel aggrieved, but very honestly wendy there’s no point accentuating the damage. my sympathies with ms lin, the damage was substantial no doubt, but i have to agree with terence on this one, cut her some slack, because being a reporter is difficult. if you really really really want to blame someone for ordering the particular angle [assuming that that was the angle intended in the first place, and that that particular angle was utterly false], blame the editors. really. in a newspaper as big as ST, journalists are unfortunately small fry. god wonders how her previous article on malays passed through anyway. seems the editor is just a sucker for controversy? i don’t know. i shan’t make the call, because im not working for SPH, see. its not easy to tell people to quit just like that because it’s not ordinary work stress, its censorship and restriction of freedom that you probably wont find in such a large degree in the workplace, because you don’t deal with the media or having to write opinions.
im not really suited to say much, i’m but 15, but hey, that’s how i feel. really i don’t want to condemn either side for anything because i’ll offend people, but IMHO let bygones be bygones.
err people look at it on a more unbiased side, dun go and anyhow accuse the ST!
I’m not taking sides, but you all must not leave out the possibility that she and her cronies are covering her ass??? I mean come on, confirm got more worse case than her, but just because she or her friends say that she isnt spoilt does not mean that she isnt one. look at the way she writes on her LJ, its clear enough that if one person is upset, they would be writing in such an arrogant tone.
@ JBA – I suppose it shouldn’t come as a surprise that someone who can’t write grammatically is defending Strait Laced.
You need to keep focused on the fact that a story was unnecessarily skewed to paint a predetermined picture, and that the journalist was aware and is unapologetic. So the issue boils down to the silly agenda of the newspaper editor, and the complicity of the journalist.
It’s like the eulogies delivered by the sons of JBJ at the funeral service a few weeks ago – all references to his political struggle were left out in Strait Laced’s coverage. It’s this utter lack of balance which destroys the credibility of the newsroom to be trusted to tell things as they are. Instead they’ll always spin whatever story is required by the powers that be.
@ Chap-As i’ve mentioned before, im not defending the straits laced, or whatever you call it, and please do not think for a moment that i cannot write grammatically, its just that i wish not to. this is a blog where everyone is open to free views, and furthermore, since this is not anything professional whereby everything has regulations and conditions to abide by, i feel that the need for a tensed and “robotic” way of typing is decadent.
So im gonna talk relaxed ^_^.
On a more serious note, well i do understand that the story was unnecessarily brought up and most parts of the article were false. But indirectly, although the direct action was wrong, this piece of news has actually brought a new matter at hand- awarness. On an impartial note, i would like to tell everyone here that i simply despise these sort of media publications that interfere in personal life and wreck relaitonships. But i also would like to tell that the ST has actually helped show normal singaporeans how the recession does not affect the rich and the elite. And further more , i have read through her LJ, and i clearly can see that she does not deny the fact that she is rich and that she has had a rich lifestyle, despite whatever her claims may be right now. Lastly, Chap, I would like to make a request that you do read her LJ once more, this time, read in between the lines, and infer from her lines on her emotions, im sure one of your caliber in the english language should have no problem.
if you’re asking us to cut the reporters some slack, then can you kindly cut her some slack pls
i’m sure we have much better things to do than to read between the lines of her blog.
the fact is that ST has talked crap on the papers.
fullstop.
whether or not she is rich, that’s her problem.
but spoilt?
i pretty much guess she is not.
like how Zheng Xi said, she stays in ntu hall.
if she is spoilt, she would have demanded her mother or father to buy her a car.
and ask them to continue giving her 500 bucks.
but she did not, well maybe its time we move on….
Well, i really cant disagree with that, and i have to say i am dissapointed with the straits times for such an act, and i wanna move on. but wouldnt you agree with me in saying that the ST actually made her look in this way based on the way she was in the past? But if she is wat you say she is, i have nothing against her. in fact, ill congratulate her. well, if agnes is not what the ST put her to be, i’d suggest a sue, with regards to false accusations, defamation etc. And i forgot to add saying that if agnes lin is how you put her to be, im at the wrong to catagorize her as an elitist scum.
@JBA
you can’t be serious, are you trying to say that all those on her LJ are her friends?
wow, then she must be super resourceful!
stop using personal attacks, we are more concerned over why ST is doing such unprofessional acts, rather than whether she is rich or not?
can you seriously read english?
500 per month is nothing really!
One day is a mere 16dollars – 3 meals a day. dude, think about it.
quit being jealous and get on with life already. Work harder and earn more money, maybe then you will become one of the elites instead of whinning here.
or maybe…. you are from ST?!!?!?!?!?!
or….are you dianah?!?!?!?!?!? oooooooooooooooooooooooooo
you sound too defensive man!
TAKE A CHILL PILL!
@JBA but wouldnt you agree with me in saying that the ST actually made her look in this way based on the way she was in the past?
e past? u mean u noe herz?
lol sean, im not jealous =.= lol i never wanna be an elite man, they make us normal people poorer. and i need to say that the ST are wrong! read wat i wrote! im suggesting that she sues them! if im working in the ST i wouldnt be suggesting to her that she sues us rite??!!! my english is clear! tts y i agreed with wendy! and as for shuying, i dun noe her, and i dont wanna noe her, wait i get pulled into the string of crap.
All im saying is tt the ST confirm got ulterior motive, i dun think they so dumb to make such a bad move, and so poorly making up stories. its all part of a bigger plan!
think!!!
[...] number of issues. She has also come out in self-defence in her blog, and several other sites (like TOC) have also commented on this issue. With that, it seems that the article published by Nur Dianah [...]
Suing ST.. mmm.. dun think the girl will hav so dip a pocket but a personal defamation suit against e reporter would b interesting….
Newsprint journalists are paid to ensure that that their employers get to sell as many newspaper as possible … sensationalization, creating major public hu..ha.. or making the articles sound as juicy as possible is part of the deal…
given the amount of attention that Nur Dianah generated, the episode could well put her in a position to receiving a big bonus for 2008 and ….. she could then herself get that S$4000 Chanel bag.
never volunteer to be interviewed by any journalists …. least you want to be portrayed differently or be totally misunderstood. It happened to me before.
I’ve had an article run in BizTimes 5 years ago while i was in my final year of school (already completed thesis and waitind to grad), and was working on a advertising startup with technology from NY then.
Being new, we wanted to have the angle in BT to help open doors to the big management of Shopping malls and cinemas we’re talking to, to get our product in the door.
The article was a disaster, using words like “Eager Beavers” in the headlines and taking quotes out of context. Ongoing deals were KIV-ed, lost, kaput. Learnt a bloody hard lesson, and keep that article laminated.
I’ve since been working hard on another startup, we’ve closed a VC round, and setup office in SV, and looking likely to do a round there as well, and have never accepted or gotten any significant local PR coverage and have been mostly under the radar past 3-4years. My CEO got bad coverage from TNP and TODAY, which only further reinforces our belief of sensationalism.
Think “Against the advice of his lecturers..” as a start line to the story.
Having said that, my contacts in BT did help with a good article after our financing round, on the back prime page as well.
It did help somewhat, but we’ve customers all over the world and not really in SG, so not overly concerned. Many good foreign websites do pick up our releases..
Bottom line is, journalists write what will move their papers, PR agencies pitch the angles their clients want, and the ordinary folk direct to journalist will always be eaten for lunch by the “old media” press.
Truly opposing points of view on the topic, courtesy to the vast majority in Agnes’ camp and the few in Dianah’s. Yet, going by the story in the ST and this TOC exclusive, the burning question is – what exactly counts for responsible journalism?
The Straits Times, as a national newspaper which readers have to pay for, owes a service to the general public to report accurate facts in its entirety, did a great injustice to Agnes Lin for its overgeneralisation in the story.
However, the quagmire is the stance of The Online Citizen – should it, as a citizen journalist website, offer a slanted view as well in its pursuit of responsible journalism? Or should TOC, in this exclusive, have taken efforts to try to seek a balance in its story?
Yes, we are thankful for TOC to offer comments deviant from what is thrown up within the mainstream media. But really, perhaps more could be done to get the government and the mainstream media to treat the TOC with respect. Yet blazing down the path which the ST took within this article failed to leave netizens (who, the mainstream media believes, are irresponsible purveyors of untruths) in good light.
On a sidenote, I believe that Terence, in his above comment, meant that we ought to cut reporters, as a profession, some slack, rather than specifically Dianah. A simple “no comment” to local journalists would in fact, stymie the growth of the journalism industry in Singapore. It does remain the ownership for journalists to be accountable to their interviewees. But the public could help by re-affirming with the journalists themselves that their quotes are taken into proper context prior to the story going on print and causing collateral damage to reputation.
And the extrapolation that WKWSCI “breeds inaccuracy, misleading readers, deceit, biasness, and fiction writing” is an insult to the integrity of the school. As a student there, I can honestly pledge that the school is doing all it can within its means, to champion responsible reporting and promote critical analysis and thinking.
Good education for Singaporeans.
Another lesson not to take everything we read in the national press, or what we hear on national TV/Radio as the truth.
We have to be discriminating and be sceptical about all ‘media’.
Too many of them have their own agenda.
Pple jump in to condemn ST & just believe whatever the little NIE girl says.
We were not in the interview. We do not what transpire. Most of us are not her friends, we do not know how much truth are there in her words…and of course how much truth are there in our latest tabloid, sunday times.
I agree with alanto72.
This report, like the one featured in ST, is based only on the “victim” ’s own rebuttal. Note that the reporter did not admit that she had distorted Agnes’s comments..
I feel that to be fair, if Agnes feels that she is really misquoted, she should write to ST forum to reveal the actual content of their interview, and then demand apology from the reporter/ST for all the anguish inflicted–if what she had claimed in this (TOC) article is true. It is only fair that we also hear ST side of the story before we make our judgement YET AGAIN!
Else I feel this article by TOC is unfair to the reporter–as ST’s is to Agnes.
I stopped reading the ST a long time ago for similar reasons. We only collect ST from our neighbours for my dog to pee & poo on. Some how, my dog prefers to pee on a limited circulation newpaper. Even dog know the different.
#111) alanto72 & #112) passerby
This TOC article is not as one-sided as you’ve made it out to be.
From the many comments; especially from those who have worked in ST’s newsroom, their accounts of how things are conducted there tells us more than what is written here.
It’s up to us to make the choice to believe who might be lying and who might be telling the truth. And, I think most of us here have the ability to discern for ourselves.
There is no need for Agnes to defend herself when we already know the response from Nur Dianah. She had admitted to leaving some ‘facts’ out because of space and time constraints.
To
111) alanto72 on November 6th, 2008 11.36 am and
112) passerby on November 7th, 2008 2.57 pm
Hmm, if u read the interview on the reporter by TOC, you will notice that the report has admitted to omitting facts due to space. Wat else is there to prove?
I mean to be a reporter, surely her command of ang mo is not light. Surely it’s confirm much heavier than me. Just look at the way i write man…
Thus by leaving out those facts, surely she knew wat kind of reaction the public would ve.
To 112) passerby
As for writing to ST to rebutt the article, haven’t u already realise tat often ST do not post letters tat is not to their advantage? If TOC did not take up this issue, i believe the gal would still be kanna flame till now since it would be her article on her blog vs the ST. Though i doubt many of us here care about ST. =X
ddfb, you are just 15, you probably don’t have very much of a reputation yet.
If you do, then you might know how damaging it is to be painted in such a bad light.
Now imagine Ms Lin is going for a scholarship interview, a few days after that article came to light. Can you say for sure that the interviewer’s impression of her will not be tainted?
She is fortunate that she appears to have some sort of scholarship or study award already. They won’t revoke it because of that one article (even if that article painted an accurate picture) but one can only just begin to imagine the damage to her reputation.
Not to mention the fact that far more people read Sh!t Times than TOC. I’m assuming again here, so correct me, if for some reason TOC has higher readership figures. Of course, quality counts, but quantity is what I’d consider when assessing damage to one’s reputation.
FYI, I’m from WKW SCI. I can vouch for the fact that we learn ethics and etc etc in class but it’s entirely up to the individual to apply them in everyday life.
I’m so glad that I won’t be working at SPH after I graduate. Phew…
116) Shawn
FYI, I’m from WKW SCI. I can vouch for the fact that we learn ethics and etc etc in class but it’s entirely up to the individual to apply them in everyday life.
I’m so glad that I won’t be working at SPH after I graduate. Phew…
We have yet another student from WKWSCI vouching for its integrity. The more we hear from these students, past and present, the more we come to grips with the damage inflicted by the ST writer and her own lack of credibility and integrity.
Shawn, working for SPH is not all that bad. It is working there without a spine of your own that contributes to the ‘BAD’ factor.
As a human being, we owe it to ourselves, if not for others, to be fair to all. It is self-betrayal if one is to advance one’s own cause at the expense of others.
How can such a person sleep peacefully at night is beyond my comprehension.
I’ve got an alternative point of view – there’s no smoke without fire. Why is this girl being portrayed like this if at least some of the stuff is not vaguely true? Why not pick on someone else? Anyway, PR 101 – if you are going to be quoted, always ask them to let you approve the draft!!!!
Anyway, all the Gen Y people – look here. I’m also an employer and I would like to think enlightened – we were cited before for stating in our ads “age is no barrier” – we have offered jobs and internships to young people (yes, those under 25). And some of these have been disappointing. Interns who don’t turn up on starting day (despite signing the letter) without informing us and only contacting us a few days later after we asked. Sleeping on the job, going for 3 hour lunch breaks while everyone else is pulling 14 hour days and the worst of worst – asking for an extension of deadline to do a task and later handing up work while admitting that nothing was done.
I’m not saying everyone is like that, but there are people out there who seem to think (actually I can’t tell what they are thinking cos it is incredulous to me), so not everyone is an angel. I’m not implying that Agnes isn’t, just blowing steam and hope the rest of you are more responsible than some of these chaps I have encountered.
[...] this is one reason why I don’t think I’d do journalism. Back when I was in journalism classes, I absolutely [...]
Lovely! Yet again some cock shit journalism by the straits times. One time on the receiving end of so called journalism should be enough for anyone with a half a brain NOT to give any interviews to the one and only newspaper in Singapore…wake up everyone..don’t believe everything you read and of course..don’t give interviews either!
Yeah way to go ST~
When i read this, i admit, i was shocked, okay, by this apparent spoilt rich girl.
But then i wondered to myself, “Acherly hor, wahrao eh, why gor this zhabor got so much balls put this in SG most read newspaper?”
Then i remembered that SG’s “Number 1″ newspaper that suprisingly NEVER puts anything that offends the gahmen, politically incorrect and all that shizz.
Anyway, Ms.Misquoted-by-government-propaganda-paper, what i suggest you do, is go ask the New Paper for interview.
Sure accept one
[...] so reminds me of my friend’s ST interview case again. I honestly doubt the accountability of ST lately. Oh wells. Possibly related posts: [...]
Hey , is this spoiled brad now standing in Geylang selling herself to support her family, since Singapore economy is now in deep crap.