Connect with us

Politics

SDP: Standards of journalism should not be benchmarked at the PAP’s standards

Published

on

The Singapore Democratic Party has issued a statement to express its concern towards the recommendations put forth by the Select Committee on Deliberate Falsehoods.

In particular, SDP notes that the call for alternative news sites to adopt the professional journalistic standards of the “mainstream media” to ensure “fairness, accuracy and integrity in reporting”, for example, cannot be taken seriously, as there has been well-documented fake news dissemination by the mainstream media.

The party wrote, “If there are journalistic standards to be maintained, they should be those prescribed by international organizations such as United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) or Reporters Sans Frontières (RSF; Reporters Without Borders). Incidentally, the press in Singapore ranks 151st out of 180 countries in the RSF’s 2018 World Press Freedom Index – a position sandwiched between Ethiopia and Swaziland.”

It also pointed out that if the Committee felt that it did not want to consider historian, Dr Thum Ping Tjin’s representation, it is free to do so. There is no need for the mainstream media to call him a liar in sensationalist headlines over the question of the exact terminology of his appointment at Oxford University.

“Resorting to name-calling is juvenile and does not reflect well on the Committee.” wrote SDP.

Below is SDP’s statement in full.

[divider style=”solid” top=”20″ bottom=”20″]

The recommendations made by the Select Committee on dealing with fake news are troubling.

The call for alternative news sites to adopt the professional journalistic standards of the “mainstream media” (taken to mean the Singapore Press Holdings and MediaCorp) to ensure “fairness, accuracy and integrity in reporting”, for example, cannot be taken seriously given our recent history.

The SPH and Mediacorp – both controlled by the government – have failed the fake-news test many times. Below are three examples:

Firstly, the SPH and the predecessors of Mediacorp described the activists arrested in 1987 as “Marxist conspirators out to violently overthrow the government”, even broadcasting the “confessions” of the detainees. No self-respecting newspaper or broadcaster would carry out such a sordid deed unquestioningly. So much for maintenance of “professional journalistic standards”.

The victims of the arrest have now come out in the open and challenged the veracity of the government’s account (even PAP cabinet ministers have questioned this state action). Yet, our print and broadcast media has remained conspicuously silent over their roles in this abject affair.

Another example was during the Bukit Batok by-election in 2016. Lianhe Wanbao falsely quoted Dr Chee Soon Juan in an interview. Mr Lee Hsien Loong then used the quote to attack Dr Chee. The SDP challenged Wanbao’s editors to reproduce the tape of the interview, but the newspaper has remained silent over the episode only making an online file correction once the misrepresentation was pointed out. The print version of the newspaper was, however, circulated.

The mainstream media has also repeatedly through the decades reported the falsehood propagated by PAP ministers that HDB-flat prices would never drop. We now know that this is not true and many Singaporeans are seriously affected.

How does the Select Committee propose to deal with these instances of well-documented fake news dissemination by the mainstream media? Instead of holding up SPH and Mediacorp as paragons of exemplary news organisations, Singaporeans want to know what does the Select Committee plan to do with fake news coming from these organisations?

Standards of journalism should not be benchmarked at the PAP’s standards because, it goes without saying, the party has a vested interest in ensuring that the news is portrayed to its advantage.

It is no coincidence that the Chairman of the Board of SPH is former PAP minister Dr Lee Boon Yang and its English/Malay/Tamil language Editor-in-Chief is Mr Warren Fernandez who was nearly selected as a PAP candidate.

If there are journalistic standards to be maintained, they should be those prescribed by international organizations such as United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) or Reporters Sans Frontières (RSF; Reporters Without Borders). Incidentally, the press in Singapore ranks 151st out of 180 countries in the RSF’s 2018 World Press Freedom Index – a position sandwiched between Ethiopia and Swaziland.

Perhaps, the most important recommendation that the Select Committee could have made, but didn’t, is to repeal the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act (NPPA) to allow a diversity of ownership and operation of news companies in Singapore. This would allow appropriate peer checks and control of fake news without the PAP’s monopoly of the print and broadcast media.

Also, if the Committee felt that it did not want to consider Dr Thum Ping Tjin’s representation, it is free to do so. There is no need for the mainstream media to call him a liar in sensationalist headlines over the question of the exact terminology of his appointment at Oxford University. After all, the people who know Dr Thum best in a professional capacity have spoken highly of him as a Rhodes scholar and an internationally regarded academic. Resorting to name-calling is juvenile and does not reflect well on the Committee.

The Select Committee also recommends a “national framework for public education initiatives” that would include curriculum in schools.

The curriculum must necessarily include views from all sides of the socio-political spectrum, not just the PAP’s. The present propaganda-type of indoctrination of our students must cease. To this end, opposition parties and civil society organisations should have access to students. Principles and tenets of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights should also be taught in our schools.

Another important issue that the Select Committee has not dealt with is that even with the best crafted laws to combat fake news, it is the implementation of the laws that Singaporeans must be wary of.

A good example of this is the Cooling-off Day provision that prohibits campaigning the day before polling during elections. When PAP candidates were caught infringing the law (examples: Ms Tin Pei Ling and Dr Vivian Balakrishnan), either no action was taken or they were let off with warnings. But when Ms Teo Soh Lung, who commented on her Facebook as an individual on Cooling-off Day, the police raided her home and confiscated her computer which was only returned to her much later and in a damaged condition.

Singapore desperately needs to open up as society matures. The introduction of “fake news” laws without the concomitant removal of laws that stifle the freedom of the press will put the future of this country in peril.

This is especially crucial as the world enters the modern era of disruption and rapid change which will require innovative and creative people to navigate, qualities that oppression and censorship cannot foster.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

People

LHY’s eulogy: Dr Lee Wei Ling, brilliant doctor and devoted daughter

In his eulogy, Lee Hsien Yang fondly remembered his sister, Dr Lee Wei Ling, as a brilliant doctor and devoted daughter who cared deeply for their parents, Lee Kuan Yew and Kwa Geok Choo. He described her as a lifelong fighter, determined to right wrongs and speak truth to power, seeing herself as a modern-day Don Quixote.

Published

on

Eulogy by Lee Hsien Yang, younger brother of Dr Lee Wei Ling, for her funeral on 12 October 2024 

Wei Ling and I have always been completely different, but we have always been close. We grew up together, and in the nature of our family, were each other’s closest family. She was almost 3 years older; Loong was in turn about 3 years her senior, but was a loner. So Ling and I grew up playing with each other. Of course, when we were little, there were physical fights. One scar I still carry from a particularly vigorous encounter serves as a reminder.

Right from the outset, Ling was always a tomboy and a fighter, and until I outgrew her, I was disadvantaged in our skirmishes. She was tough and strong and, whilst we disagreed and continued to disagree on much, I loved and admired her dearly. She carried that spirit of a fighter throughout her life, seeking to right wrongs, with a preparedness to speak truth to power.

She was straight as an arrow, and would not mince her words. She had a reckless streak and could be impetuous. She saw herself as a modern day Don Quixote: an idealist, a hero, determined with dogged tenacity, stoic and ever-conscious of the need to withstand suffering.

Ling strove hard throughout her life to excel. She was outstanding academically – studious, driven, and intense. Perhaps her competitive fighting spirit came from a desire to be recognised and valued by our parents, even though she was second born and a girl. She loved animals and wanted to be a vet but was persuaded by our parents to pursue medicine instead.

Always wanting to earn their approval, she graduated at the top of her class in medical school in Singapore and won a slew of prizes. Today, when I look back, I wish our family had acknowledged and recognised at home her accomplishments. It would have meant the world to her.

Physical fitness was also something she excelled at and both my father and myself value physical fitness from her encouragement. She was a superb long distance runner. Because of her, my father gave up golf and took up jogging. While I am reasonably fit, and could easily pass my physical fitness tests with flying colours, Ling was always a better long distance runner.

Ling and I attended karate class together and she became a Karate black belt; she was not someone to be messed with! She exercised with fanatical devotion and her typical regime would involve hours of exercise on a cross trainer, a rowing machine and swimming. As she aged and became prone to injury, she resented having to scale back her exercise regime. Ling sought in running, and in life, to “fill the unforgiving minute With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run”

Ling was a brilliant doctor with strong clinical skills. Fern and I would consult her whenever any of our 3 sons was sick or had medical issues, and she was invariably spot on in her diagnosis, even in areas outside her speciality.

We valued and trusted her judgement and skills as a doctor. She in turn sought investment advice from me. Bedside manners were not her forte, and completely in character, she never sugar-coated her diagnosis to patients. But she was straightforward and would always be her patients’ best champion. I have heard myself countless stories of patients’ gratitude for this, and have learnt of a few more since her passing.

Surprisingly, Ling discovered she enjoyed penning her thoughts and views, and for many years had a very popular weekly newspaper column. She was deeply disappointed when it was terminated in 2016. Each week we would always hear at home her excited plans for her next article and her book compendium of articles made the bestsellers list to her huge delight.

Ling loved the outdoors and was a keen, if disorganised, hiker. She loved the sense of adventure, the freedom and the adrenaline rush that it gave her.

In early 2020 before Covid, on her request, I travelled to Machu Picchu with her. It was high on her bucket list, and was a long trip. Machu Picchu was built on a very remote and isolated steep outcrop and was challenging for her as her incipient illness had affected her sense of balance and mobility. Nonetheless, with a little help she managed to get around the citadel. She loved and thoroughly enjoyed the experience. I am so glad we made that trip together.

As often is the lot of an unmarried daughter, the caring of our parents as they aged fell on Ling. She nursed and cared for each of them through their illnesses and old age frailties, and for this I remain eternally grateful.

Ling lived her entire life at 38 Oxley Road. It was the only home she knew and she wanted to live out her days in her home.

It was for this reason that Papa gave her that right to live there. He knew it meant much to her. In the years following Mama’s first stroke in 2003, Ling cared for Mama and became Papa’s primary companion and confidant at home. Although, as two strong personalities they sometimes disagreed, they also became much closer.

Papa was always very open and public about his wishes. In that period from 2003 to his passing in 2015, Papa spoke with Ling extensively, including on his hopes and his concerns for the future. Everyone knows that Papa was always against any deification of himself and was against monuments or memorials; Ling knew how very strongly he felt.

In April 2016, she wrote, “Lee Kuan Yew would have cringed at the hero worship just one year after his death”

In 2017, she persuaded me to stand up with her for our father’s wishes. I am proud to have stood with her.

Ling was not one who was afraid to talk about or prepare for death. She provided that only myself and my middle son, Huan, should make decisions on her care. As they were both middle children, she had always seen in Huan a kindred spirit, and the two of them had holidayed together.

It has been my privilege, with Huan’s help, to deal with her affairs and organise her care arrangements during her illness. I am deeply grateful to her doctors Dr Philiip Yap of Khoo Teck Puat Hospital and Prof Tan Eng King of NNI. In addition, Wee Tin, Jackie, Nurse Michelle, Lina, Cheng Piau and many others, have all helped with the care for Ling. Thank you.

She wanted a very simple funeral and for her ashes to be scattered at sea.

I said my goodbyes to Ling in June 2022. I wish I could have been here today for this final farewell. Huanwu has been a stalwart in organising her care in my absence, and I am very grateful to Huanwu and Shaowu for being there for Ling at this time.

Ling directed me to convey the following statement on her passing:

“My father’s, LEE KUAN YEW, and my mother’s, KWA GEOK CHOO, unwavering and deeply felt wish was for their house at 38 Oxley Road, Singapore 238629 to be demolished upon the last parent’s death. LEE KUAN YEW had directed each of his 3 children to ensure that their parents’ wish for demolition be fulfilled. He had also appealed directly to the people of Singapore. Please honour my father by honouring his wish for his home to be demolished.”

Farewell Ling, You will always be my special big sister.

Continue Reading

Comments

LHL’s 15-minute visit to Dr Lee Wei Ling’s wake raises eyebrows among Singaporeans

On the evening of 10 October, Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his wife, Ho Ching, attended Dr Lee Wei Ling’s wake, staying for about 10-15 minutes. This brief visit sparked online discussions about the custom of family members remaining throughout the day at funerals.

Published

on

On Thursday evening (10 October), Singapore’s mainstream media, stationed outside Singapore Casket where Dr Lee Wei Ling’s wake was held, reported the arrival of Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his wife, Ho Ching, to attend his sister’s funeral.

Dr Lee, the daughter of Singapore’s founding Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew, passed away on 9 October at the age of 69, at her family home at 38 Oxley Road.

Her wake is being held at Singapore Casket from 10 October to 12 October.

According to Lianhe Zaobao, SM Lee and Mdm Ho arrived outside Singapore Casket at around 8.30 pm.

They reportedly stayed at the wake for about 10 minutes and did not provide any comments to the media.

In contrast, the South China Morning Post reported that SM Lee and Mdm Ho stayed for approximately 15 minutes before leaving.

A member of the public who paid respects to Dr Lee shared with TOC that SM Lee had written a simple “RIP” in the condolences book.

Mr Li Yipeng, the eldest son of Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong, also attended Dr Lee’s wake earlier.

Observing comments on social media, some users questioned the brevity of SM Lee’s visit to his sister’s wake.

One user remarked that even attending a friend’s funeral typically lasts at least 30 minutes, asking, “Where can you find a brother who attends his sister’s funeral for just 15 minutes?”

Others pointed out that it is customary for family members to stay the entire day at a funeral, particularly the eldest brother, who usually greets visitors and offers hospitality, such as refreshments.

“That’s what family members do,” one user noted.

A netizen lamented that instead of receiving guests at his sister’s wake, LHL appeared as a VIP guest accompanied by bodyguards.

Another user expressed sadness over the situation, noting that the eldest brother was attending the wake like any other outsider.

The comment highlighted that Lee Hsien Yang, the younger brother, was organizing the funeral remotely and could not return.

This led to a broader question among netizens: Would LHL attend his own brother’s funeral if he were to pass first?

Some netizens disagreed with the criticism of LHL’s attendance at his sister’s wake, arguing that, regardless of public sentiment towards the government, this is a personal matter.

One comment emphasised the need for objectivity, stating that people cannot judge LHL solely based on appearances or media reports.

He questioned what LHL might have done for his sister behind the scenes and pointed out that even if he had stayed longer, some would still find fault with his actions.

A comment on Reddit expressed that while LHL doesn’t necessarily need to be invited, his absence from receiving mourners as the eldest family member suggests he was not asked or instructed to participate in the funeral proceedings at all.

A netizen lamented that family disputes deeply affect one’s soul, particularly when reconciliation with a sibling is impossible, even in death.

The Reddit comment emphasised the emotional pain that arises from being reminded of happy childhood moments during such difficult times.

 

Continue Reading

Trending