by Ravi Philemon
Ms Tessa Wong who is a journalist at The Straits Times commented on The Online Citizen’s Facebook page that “ST has always maintained it is a pro-Singapore paper. Some people have equated that to be pro-PAP, but I can say for a fact that increasingly this definition of pro-Singapore has broadened to include a variety of views”.
On the surface it looks like it is indeed a fair statement, that The Straits Times and the Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) is indeed only pro-Singapore and not pro-PAP. But that is until you look at who’s who in the Board of Directors at the Singapore Press Holdings.
The current Chairman of SPH is Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam. Dr Tan a member of the People’s Action Party (PAP), was elected Member of Parliament in 1979. Besides holding various key positions in the government, he was also Deputy Prime Minister from 1995 to 2005.
Another member in the Board of Directors is Mr Alan Chan Heng Loon. Besides serving in the Transport Ministry as a Permanent Secretary and in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as Deputy Secretary, Mr Chan was also the Principal Private Secretary to then Senior Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew.
Yet another Board member is Mr Lucien Wong Yuen Kai, the Managing Partner of Allen & Gledhill LLP. This law firm has often acted for key people in the government like Mr Lee Kuan Yew, Mr Lee Hsien Loong and Mr Goh Chok Tong. The current Law and Home Affairs Minister, Mr K Shanmugam was a Senior Partner in this firm.
The PAP has a long history of dominating the press in Singapore. For example, Mr S R Nathan (now President of Singapore) a former Director of the Security and Intelligence Division with the Ministry of Defence, was appointed Executive Chairman of Straits Times (ST) in 1982.
When Mr S R Nathan was appointed Executive Chairman, one of the directors of the then Board of ST Sir Keith Macpherson resigned from the Board saying, “it is not possible for us to continue an association with a newspaper which is now clearly government dominated.”
During a budget debate in March 1982 the then opposition MP Mr J B Jeyaretnam opposed the appointment of Mr S R Nathan and claimed that Mr Nathan “had no newspaper experience, but had been head of intelligence and had worked for the Japanese police during the occupation”.
Mr Nathan then claimed that he had been “maliciously and viciously slandered” and challenged Mr Jeyaretnam to retract or repeat his comments outside parliament. When Mr Jeyaretnam did not oblige him, Mr Nathan issued an open letter to Mr Jeyaretnam complaining of abuse of parliamentary privilege “to insinuate a connection (between Mr Nathan) and Kempeitai atrocities”.
Besides Mr Nathan, others in the Board of Management or the editorial team of SPH continue to have links with the PAP government. The former Executive President of SPH Tjong Yik Min was the head of Internal Security Department (ISD) before he was appointed to SPH. Former journalists Irene Ho, Susan Sim and current political editor Chua Lee Hoong are all former ISD employees.
In her comment on TOC’s Facebook, Ms Wong also said that she has written articles on the opposition parties that paint them in a fair and arguably favourable light. An article co-written by Ms Wong, “Is the opposition ready to rock?”, seems to insinuate that the candidates of quality from the opposition may not have the perseverance to stay in opposition politics if they lost the next election. Is this the fair and favourable light of the ST?
After careful scrutiny, one can only come to the conclusion that SPH and ST do believe that being pro-Singapore and being pro-PAP are both one and the same. One can also argue that even the recent ‘fair and favourable’ reporting by ST of opposition parties is because PAP is now singing a different tune, that opposition parties have made their contribution to national debate.
SPH and the mainstream media in Singapore in the words of Cherian George is “at least in part, willing partners of the state”. It is indeed sad if journalists like Ms Wong has not realised this.
The question to ask then (with J B Jeyaretnam) is if a ‘castrated’ and ‘manacled’ press consistent with Singapore being a vibrant and competitive economy in the 21st century?
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
No matter what teresa said, they are still responsible for whatever they have written for the last 50 years. Dun tell me its us who is responsible?
Nobody 17 December 2010
Please stop criticizing Ms Wong and give her a break cos it’s always a tough job to be a journalist in Singapore
…………….
that what dr balekampon says also..it tough bein a ministers who caanot even grant a few $$$ xtras for the poor and the ole…
butt every 9th of the month when he correct his wages..
he would had echoed limsiasuayed words..
wah! so many ZEROs behind…
ps…if davidlim the former potential minister can resigned based on humane ground…what else is new?
Reporters job requires intelligence, maturity, good english , analytical skills and communication skills and need good general knowledge.
So, when they chose this job, they know what the organization is about and have heard about it and should have done research on the org .
These adults know what they are doing. They accept job with eyes wide open. They are not forced into it. They know a lot in order to report a lot on many things and stories . If they dun agree with the style or culture of the org, they are free man and women to walk away or apply overseas media jobs and work ad expats FT’s .
So, it’s beyond reasonable doubt that they are responsible and accountable for their literature.
to sway people’s minds, even a photo is likely chosen with care. like how the papers often put unflattering photos of Dr Chee SJ, an alternative party member, then go on to demonise the character.
can i too say the same for this “demsel in distress”? generally more people will come to the aid of a demure female than a stout looking guy, even if the guy can be a victim.
but i have to say Tessa Wong isn’t the biggest fish, so comments ought to reflect on this fact as well. maybe she is just doing her job getting voices critical of govt policies as part of a new course in hope to sell more newspapers?
the media has to do its part to be responsible. not hold partisan (& distorted) views that put S’poreans in bad light. if the writers do not get the sense of propotion accurate enough, they cannot blame posters online for reciprocating.
an article in Straits Times about an article about public transport (distance based fares), quote:
“While 2/3s of commuters would pay less, the cost would be higher for the remaining 1/3. Within Daysof the changeover, the latter went into overdrive filing complaints.”
dunno the breakdown of those who file complains though, what % true-blue S’poreans, % new convert S’poreans, % PRs, not sure if foreign students, FTs/FWs included anot… since the papers were the medium that was indirectly rsponsible for speading the “miscommunication”, it should have corrected the misconception or they could sue PTC for it?
:P
ST reporter Tessa Wong has missed one teeny point, viz:
It is NOT what ST thinks of itself (or what ST reporters think of ST) that matters.
I can assert that I sell the best char kway teow east of Toa Payoh – Really???
What matters is what the readers (actual or potential) think of ST.
ST may think we are unfair to it or we are prejudiced against it.
When there is no need for political correctness, the honest predominant public consensus based on ST’s track record is that ST has been and will more than likely continue to be more “compliant”, rather than “independent”.
To me, that’s how ST lost its credibility which it has to fight to regain if it chooses to … NOT with words of assertion but with deeds of commission.
I buy ST to find out sales advertisements :):)
For facts? Nah, there’s better avenues.
To improve my English langugage? There’s better choices, just read The Age and a stark comparison is seen.
Don’t take ST seriously, you’ll only end up brainwashed or getting angry with stupid lies.
@Tessa W
It is brave of you to still engage those who have posted some sordid comments.
I must compliment you for your courage to try and make a change from within.
However, I have seen too many with such a noble attidute to just end up on the side-lines or consumed themselves.
I do not want to judge, but the ball is in your court.
Good Luck, again.
@ Tessa Wong,
to me, Ravi did a pretty good job arguing his case and it’s hard to ignore the comprehensive list of people who can easily influence the agenda of S.T. and SPH.
i will go a step further by asking you to present Ravi’s article to the German people, to jolt their memory and learn from them whether the current scenario in S’pore is similar to what Germany was like under Hitler and his Gestapo…of course we’re talking about media and propaganda strategy only.
while you ponder about it Tessa, perhaps you can look at Hitler’s personality, include Kim of N Korea, Castro of Cuba too. after that, compare them to our own despot. when you are done, kindly tell TOC readers whether it is possible to change things from within.
and Tessa, please be mindful that our despot had 40+ years to fool around with our minds…and he is still around with his son.
@Happy ST Reader,
I adopt the same stance when Shitty Times is concerned lah.
Having said that,hope each and everyone us can see thru the charade and the propaganda machine that which it is.
It purports to be a nation-building press but in reality it is a party-building press! It is a mere mouthpiece and simply parroting or regurgitating what has been told or what is circumscribed to them.
Journalism – no lah, straw-clutching reporting to keep one’s bread and butter is more like it.
SPH is an utter disgrace. To be ranked 136 below Zimbabwe is shameful. The way it continues to support PAP, despite being a national newspapers, is embarrassing. Just wait for their ranking after the elections. They will be bottom 3 in the world. The Directors are recalcritants with their hidden agendas.
The SPH papers are as good as toilet papers which, after use, can be sent back to them, in its raw form, for re-cycling.
I remember a Japanese journalist working for the Singapore Monitor saying: “If you have a political conscience, you will not work for a Singapore-based newspaper.” He was a good writer and left to work for other newspapers overseas.
Based on professional ethics , what is the ranking of these journalists ? Got such ranking? With this ranking they can put in their resume and apply job in CNN BBC abc or kcclt
Tessa, no. 136 lah. What is there to talk.
I think Ms. Wong might have been assigned to engage the TOC to see the majority sentiment of the people here. Probably with instruction from the grand master to test out and decide what will PAP’s strategy for this coming election.
Dog will be dog, like many here said. If Ms. Tessa is really keen in changes, she probably move and get out of the SPH. I don’t think this is a fish slipped out of the net.
All these years, the PAP had been so focus in suppressing the opposition voice that they do not have time to think of what the Sibgapore people needs. To the point that they increase their wage to sky high really tell that they are ready to pack their bag and leave this country when things go bad. I think they know they are losing grip on control. Their policies no long substain and is getting out of control.
The grand master is starting to reveal his truth nature. Question is, who will his dark vader?
Democracy presupposes an independent media. WHen it is absent which obviously and undeniably is what it is now.
For a supposedly first world country/nation (as always bragged by the incumbents) it is indeed sad and undignifying to know that for the sake of political expediency the people are denied the truth in so many areas/issues and …
When one purports to be an ethical or responsible journalist but in reality is being pusillanimous or even impartial about reporting or writing that which is true, then one is simply being complicit to the crime of denial and suppression of truth.
If the ST is really impartial as they claim to be, they should run a series of factual articles on the broken PAP promises after the last election.
Otherwise drop the charade of impartiality and be honest about being Pro-PAP. The Straits Times is the Fox News of Singapore, not the New York Times!
@Ganga
Thanks you for the reply. That’s serious huh? Rather call a whore than working for PAP. Haha… Cheers and merry christmas.
Here is the proof of SPH being pro-PAP.
I refer to Straits Times today’s (7th July 2011) article “Tan Kin Lian to submit elgibility forms today” on page A4 written by Tessa Wong.
I wish to highlight how this report was written to sway public opinion against Mr Tan.
1) In Mr Tan’s facebook page. He had written that he declined his MP job in 1985 due to his disagreement with PAP’s policy direction. However, Ms Tessa, instead of giving him the benefit of doubt, inserted a line which I quote “Sources say he declined because he was not assured of being appointed to political office”. Any unsuspecting reader would have been given the impression that Mr Tan had lied and is dishonest in his intention.
2) Also, in his facebook page, he had mentioned that the reason why he had continued to remain as a PAP member until 2008 was “I did not want to quit earlier as it was necessary for me to preserve good relations with the ministers and the NTUC leaders, for the sake of NTUC Income.” This critical piece of information which would provide readers a better understanding of his independence from political influence was conveniently omitted in Tessa Wong’s article.
As Ms Tessa Wong has conveniently left out her email address in the article, I would suggest readers to email her to point out her biased reporting and urged her to improve on her reporting standard and stop confusing people about SPH being pro-Singapore when it is obviously pro-PAP.
Tessa could be contacted at twong@sph.com.sg