~by: Ravi Philemon~
~pictures: Shawn Danker~

‘Change’ was the theme of the 2011 Presidential Election. All four candidates tried to articulate and win over the electorate with their version of change.

For Presidential candidate Mr Tan Kin Lian, it was change through demystifying the office of the President. He wanted to do this by producing an annual report to account for the reserves under the custody of the President.

For Mr Tan Jee Say it was the substance of change.  He wanted the President to be unaffiliated to the ruling party so that the primary role of the President which (according to him) was to check and balance the government would besides being independent, would also be perceived as non-symbiotic.

For Dr Tan Cheng Bock, change was about symbolism. He advocated for a clear separation of the offices of the President and Prime Minister.  He wanted the Prime Minister’s Office to shift from the Istana and be situated elsewhere.

Even for President-elect Dr Tony Tan, it was change by the acceptance of the ‘new normal’. A ‘new normal’ which will see a stronger opposition in Parliament to compliment the ruling party to formulate better policies to enable a better Singapore.

In the end it was about who communicated their idea of change the best; it was also about whose idea of change the majority accepted (even if it was razor-thin) as something they can live with.

And speaking about communication of ideas, I think the new media was more instrumental in deciding the winners in the Presidential Election, than it was in the last General Election.

Let me explain.

In my opinion, it was Dr Tony Tan and Mr Tan Jee Say who went across various platforms to not only communicate their ideas, but also to give alternate media almost unhindered access to cover their campaign.

This was the reason why Mr Tan Jee Say was able to garner more than 25 per cent of the votes, and Dr Tony Tan was able to convince those that were ‘sitting on the fence’ that he may be worth considering.

And when I say the new media was more instrumental in deciding the winners of this election, I do not mean those that tried to reach out from their own new media platforms, (for going by that, Dr Tan Cheng Bock and Mr Tan Kin Lian were perhaps more tech-savvy than the other two) but those who besides engaging from platforms of their own, also engaged from those of others.

For example the team that was covering the Presidential election from TOC, needn’t guess on the schedule of Tan Jee Say during the campaign. His media team was very proactive in providing the full run-down of his schedule and gave unhindered access to our team.

As for Tony Tan, he kept engaging TOC despite the critical pieces our writers were writing about his campaign.  He had absolutely no reason to do so.

Contrast this with one candidate’s “you are the one who wrote nasty articles about me right?” confrontation; and “Because I’ve never heard of you guys from the online media and my friends haven’t either, so it’s hard for us to take you seriously. The important media is the print media”, dismissal by another.

In a four-cornered, tightly fought election, proactive engagement with a platform like TOC could have given Tony Tan and Tan Jee Say that little bit of edge.

TOC congratulates Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam on being elected.

Going forward, it will be very difficult for the new President to not keep engaging the people of Singapore, using  different and varied platforms.

In fact, this was the question TOC asked President -elect Dr Tony Tan at his media conference after his electoral victory, “How does he intend to remain accessible to the people of Singapore?”

To which Dr Tan replied that there are “many noises” before correcting himself, “voices – sorry” in Singapore today, and that he intends to reach them through small group gatherings and community events.

At the media conference, I had a relook at the handout which was given out (it was a copy of Dr Tony Tan’s statement at the media conference), and I was drawn to the words, “[Big SMILE]” on the handout; which was a personal reminder for him to smile at a certain juncture of making his statement.

I think this will be descriptive of the tenure of the new President. He will have to have a personal reminder to engage and remain accessible to the people who elected him, ever so often.


Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Hong Kong govt offices reopen after temporary closure following rally on Sun

A day after closing down its offices in central Hong Kong in…

雇主申诉 旗下客工所住宿舍房间臭虫肆虐

有雇主向本社申诉,他旗下的客工住在客工宿舍,但所住房间却臭虫肆虐,客工不堪其扰。 这名雇主的客工住在卓源路的西雅卓源宿舍(Westlite Toh Guan),据了解上周这名雇主就已向有关当局投诉,客工所住房间有臭虫问题,但迟至本月13日才有行动。 这名雇主分享给本社的一些照片,可看出房间墙上有臭虫留下的痕迹,是在本月3日拍摄的。这可能意味着他们从本月初就得忍受臭虫的叮咬! 这名雇主也曾向非政府组织 Raining Raincoats反映后者同样也投诉到人力部,直到上周四才有处理。不过,也只有其中两间客工住的房间有用天那水(俗称“火水”)喷洒灭臭虫,其他的房间仍未处理,直到前日才全部获得灭虫。 房间获涂抹天那水,但客工不被允许离开 然而,在宿舍经营者进行灭虫工作时,客工仍不被允许离开房间,结果必须忍受难闻的天那水气味。要知道天那水会刺激眼、鼻、喉, 长期高浓度接触该品出现眩晕,灼烧感,咽炎,支气管炎,乏力,易激动等。吸入过多都会造成肝肾损伤。 雇主为他的员工发声,指出在宿舍封锁期间,客工的健康引起他的关注,再者还有其他公司的员工,也同样待在同一座宿舍。尽管他的员工会保持房间整洁,但健康还是变得更糟。甚至其中一名客工,被安排与两名确诊客工住一起!…

SingHealth cybersecurity fiasco: IHiS employees in the dark on steps to take during cyber-attack due to inadequate training

In a public hearing before the Committee of Inquiry (COI) on Friday…

【总理诉梁实轩】仅凭贴文截图作分析 林鼎质疑供证律师报告

总理李显龙提告时评人梁实轩的诽谤诉讼,于本周二开始至周五(6日至9日),在高庭公堂审理。 在聆讯第二日,诉方传召专家证人潘光俊(Tuan Quang Phan)博士,希望能说明诽谤性贴文的流传度。总理李显龙亦在今日(7日),身着粉红衬衫和灰色西服出庭旁听。 潘博士是香港大学经管学院,市场营销、创新与信息管理副教授,据知他研究社交媒体平台信息传播逾15年。他今日是从香港通过视讯,为官司供证。 不过,潘博士却指出,他并未掌握梁实轩有关涉事脸书贴文的原始数据,仅仅取得一张该帖文的截图。而他根据过往统计研究,作出保守估计。他指梁实轩脸书仅有5千脸书朋友,但他分析实际读到该贴文的人数应该多上好几倍。 有鉴于梁的脸书是公开账号,加之这类政治新闻的受关注程度,他估计至少200至400人读到贴文和所转载文章,在1万1749名面簿用户的“新闻流”。 但潘博士也指出,自己是在总理代表律师文达星事务所的协助下,准备上述报告。林鼎也认为,既然没有梁实轩贴文的流量数据,恐怕潘博士的报告不过是“揣测”(guesswork)。后者则重申这些都是根据过往统计研究,得出的保守估计。 潘博士也指脸书还有“热门话题”功能,但林鼎也随即提醒,这功能是否只有脸书粉丝专页才能操作。 再者,林鼎也质疑潘博士是否中立,包括他在前往香港前,曾在新加坡国立大学从事研究工作长达九年,也曾接受狮城政府不同单位拨款,例如教育部耗资820万元的项目。对此潘博士则驳斥自己从未见过、也否认偏袒总理。 由于梁实轩分享贴文后,包括内政兼律政部长尚穆根、金管局等都已采取行动,并获得主流媒体广泛报导更正消息。但林鼎也斥责,专家报告中却对此只字不提。 梁实轩不供证 …