“Volkswagen and The Straits Times are brands with a successful history and a reputation of trust.” – Mr Leon Gumpert, general manager, Sales Singapore, at Volkswagen Group Singapore. (its Times, 15 August 2009)
“So they have to adapt but they have to remain objective, maintain a high quality newspaper and if you read something in the Straits Times or on CNA, you must know that it’s real.” – PM Lee in his National Day Rally speech in 2008.
In Parliament on 18 August, Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam was asked to reveal the reasons for Mr Charles Goodyear’s resignation from Temasek Holdings. In his reply, Mr Tharman said:
People do want to know, there is curiosity, it is a matter of public interest. That is not sufficient reason to disclose information. It is not sufficient that there be curiosity and interest that you want to disclose information.”
However, in the printed edition of the Straits Times the next day, 19 August, Mr Tharman’s “public interest” remark was inexplicably left out. The Straits Times published an ad verbatim transcript of the exchanges in Parliament betwen Mr Tharman and MPs. So, why was Mr Tharman’s “public interest” remark edited out of the transcript?
Did the Straits Times intentionally leave out Mr Tharman’s admission that the issue of Mr Goodyear’s resignation was of public interest?
Here’s Today’s report which included the remark left out by the Straits Times:
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
You can do anything with your house organ, isn’t it?
But, I heard him on TV and I am sure many others did.
Will someone please put it on Youtube.
IT’s an honest mistake
SPH got nice big building for us to see too.
Straits Times should just add a subheader on the top of its front page reading: “A publication of SPH and PAP.”
Remember the mee siam mai hum speech became mee siam mai hiam (no chilli) published. Sounded better. If not mee siam where got hum (cockles)? But you can have chilli or no chilli added.
Actually quite normal lah, to do touch ups here and there to look good.
ST should make clarification why it is left out. Somebody must have directed ST to do it
It is of public interest to know whether someone directed ST to remove the public interest remark from the publication.
why don’t you write to the ST and ask why this was left out?
they can omit that line, but it does not mean people do not know that TH fiasco is a matter of public interest.
all creatures of darkness fear light, so the more everyone should cast some more light on them!!
i wonder if other SWFs are doing some “digging” themselves… :)
Lau Lee once said that our ST is so good that foreign governments refer it for information (maybe it is Myamar?). Junior Lee also once said that our ST is a quality, solid paper with good journalism, not some kind of cowboy internet forum……..
Opps, looks like our mainstream media are working hard for an even LOWER ranking on Reporters Without Borders.
Looks like 144th is not low enough, we shall see next year.
Oh yea, its probably nothing, I’m over-reacting, its just an honest mistake.
SPH is just an intelligence gathering and propaganda office masquerading as a news agency.
public interest is a highfalutin aspiration. Lets be realistic.
SPH should be renamed Papers And Publications
Tharman may kena mark liao, any how talk, never consult the Lees.
http://imcms2.mediacorp.sg/CMSFileserver/documents/006/pdf/20090819/1908FPG001.pdf
it’s all here…
All of you stupid, ST belong to who? Who control the SPH. Who is the chairman sitting there. Must support the PAP what. No need to mention. This is what call free media or open society in s’pore.
So guys, don’t think so much. Just exercise your important vote in thsi coming election.
BTW, is there a way to protest or fight to change the GRC system in the next election.Any clue????
the way they wayang is just so cartoon and so stupid. they think we are all so goondu.
way to go man.
Don’t worry guys.
That part was faithfully recorded in “TODAY” on front page yesterday (19th August 2009).
So, we can believe all MSM.
SPH is a ‘tool’ with alot of reach….
Hi Yang #16,
Just attend Opposition rally whether Opposition is contesting in your ward or not.
I am sure PAP will not overlook the sheer size of supporters even if the votes don’t reflect this.
Hhm…maybe State Times should invest in time machine or the equipment used by MIB.
Hi guys @ SPIN (pardon..that’s what the new corporate logo looked like)…you deserves the high ranking like Jinx…top 5 from the bottom
Not missing lah…probably printed in SPH’s patented “invisible” ink…look closer :)
What will be interesting to see is if it will be censored in the Hansard too.
This is the matter of pubic interest on Chip Goodyear:
http://johnharding.com/
Another fiaso from our “Award winning” newsapaper . No wonder the public might be misled when 100% information were not given.
If it was a condemnation of the opposition mistakes, this newspaper will proudly published them in bold.
It is removed to appease their master.
call shenanigans!
I wonder how these ST journos sleep at night. So thick skinned lapdogs.
Once again, another childish act by SPH. They really think they’re the only media in Singapore? Well the BEST MEDIA is people telling me straight in the face, no need through newspapers or radio. Haha. SPH lose.
if ST can anyhow “miss out” sentences, what else won’t they do??
lose billions become lose millions?
its true. even ‘today’ is better than ST.
they were the only one who published MM’s apology for claiming exxon-mobile invested due to him when infact it had nothing to do with him.
maybe thats why LKY was so hot in parliament these few days.
malu those ang moh expose him instead of backup his lies.
How dare ShittyTimes censor those words of Tharman ? Do they even know that it will alter the impact and overall message of Tharman ? Tharman as minister must sue ShittyTimes over that because “it is a matter of public interest”.
that was a freudian slip. tharman wasn’t thinking right when he conceded that it was a matter of public interest.
therefore the st has to do damage control lest more singaporeans realize that “hey, the pap government really doesn’t care about public interest – no accountability, no transparency.”
If U don’t listen to yor Big Boss at this recession time, U have to take 3year unpaid leave. Or he will give U some idiom “Sayonara” Balek Kampong “Sack”
Li Teo Pock. GoodBye. God Bless U. Take Care
I stopped believing in Straits Times long ago.
This is not a surprise. There’ll be more to come.
Well Well, another undeniable prove on the trust-ability of ST and the accountability of our dear leaders….come on singaporeans….for how long more do you want to be ruled by these people?
poor old MM still cannot let go. WHY? because there still a bunch ofunless guys around cannot run this country well. Do all of you understand!!!!
All this so call eltie got paper but no brain!!!
It is of public interest to vote Tharman out of Parliament!
“poor old MM still cannot let go. WHY? because there still a bunch ofunless guys around cannot run this country well. Do all of you understand!!!!”
Can’t you see that MM deliberately want this type of useless ministers in order to show others that he still need to be around and indispensable ? Beside useless and ball-less ministers can’t threaten his Leegime compare to competent counterpart. All Emperors in history will eliminate those powerful people they seen as a threat, including those beside them. Our emperor is not much different. See how quick he remove all the old guards except himself, and create enunchs and concubines to serve him and his family.
GoodYear should known better.
“if you read something in the Straits Times or on CNA, you must know that it’s real.”
Yes, we know. We know that its’ real that they edited out that comment!
LHL, eversince you became PM, it’s been one fiasco after another. And we’re paying you…… how much is it again?
What is the use of this article IF
the youths and adults do NOT READ this ?
‘Do not read ‘ can be materialised as follows:
1. oblivious
2. info not presented to them
3. they do not visit socio-politico sites.
4. they hooked on computer games and the materialistic world.
How to reach the masses?
ST is actually idiot-proofing the reproduction of the comment as (stupid) Singaporeans won’t be able to understand. What Tharman meant by his comment is how ST reports it – ‘curiosity is not enough justification for disclosure’. People are taking the ‘public interest’ remark out of context as he was obviously referring to the general interest of the public.
However, what interests me more is that this fact clearly illustrates and serves as concrete evidence of how ST (or the people working there) is partisan to PAP.
*42: “However, what interests me more is that this fact clearly illustrates and serves as concrete evidence of how ST (or the people working there) is partisan to PAP.”
Evidence of bias can be found each day in the papers.
TOC is super sharp. You’ve my respect.
if the opposition have done this same mistake it will repeated again untill the poor guy will be sued
Ganga: There is no need for ST to ‘idiot-proof’ another person’s quote. That’s censorship. And for the ST to present it as if it was a direct quote is unprofessional and dishonest.
To me, there are more possibilities of interpretation than the one you offered. It may well have been an idiomatic slip; or it could have been a deliberate attempt at ambiguity, even subversion. There’re contrarian politicians who deliberately let slip public statements, inciting backlash for future political manoeuvre, sometimes for the public’s benefit. In any case, double entendres add to the fun. And Freudian slips can be revealing.
Therefore, I cannot disagree more with your condescending view on Singaporeans. There’re dumb ones, and there’re bright ones, and may be best man/view/interpretation win.
Can James Gomaz’s action during election be considered as Freudian slips of action then ?
“A Freudian slip, or parapraxis, is an error in speech, memory, or physical action that is interpreted as occurring due to the interference of some unconscious (‘dynamically repressed’) wish, conflict, or train of thought.” From wiki.
Why PAP can have Freudian slip as they wish and as they like whereas opp party cannot have Freudian slip ? Isn’t that double standard ?
Yes Daniel, it’s a double-standard. That is why ST should not have left that statement out.
Anyway, the whole point of a Freudian slip is it is unconscious (as you’d now know from the wiki definition) and is not within the control of the original speaker. I believe what you’re getting at is not Freudian slips per se, but the question of power. Or rather, the critique of those who abuse it.
46) Federick on August 20th, 2009 8.33 pm, I meant the condescending bit as how our authorities view Singaporeans – so in that respect I couldn’t disagree with ‘myself’ more too!
But having read the exchange and viewing Tharman’s comments in the context I mentioned earlier, coupled with the known fact that our ministers et al simply do not have the capacity to appreciate that an element of ‘public interest’ even exists in Singapore in the first place (otherwise, they woudn’t have been so horribly callous during the Mas Selamat incident), I assert that we’re persecuting him on a non-issue insofar as this little statement is concerned.
That is of course not to say that he should be spared criticism for his actions – based on the holistic perspective of his performance thus far during his ‘job-hopping’ tenure.
- Ganga, the issue is not Tharman’s remarks, but ST’s removal of it.