SDP:Why the delay in reporting news of such magnitude?

[Relacklabrudder]

Why the delay in reporting news of such magnitude?

Thursday, 26 January 2012

Singapore Democrats

 

Ms Saw Phaik Hwa made her decision to resign as SMRT CEO on 7 December 2011 but the public only came to know about it one month later on 6 January 2012.

 

Central Narcotics Bureau Director Ng Boon Gay was arrested in December last year and Singapore Civil Defence Force chief Peter Lim on 4 January this year for unspecified wrongdoing. But the news was kept from the public for until now.

 

The news were not run-of-the-mill stories; they involved incompetence and wrongdoing that ran at the highest reaches of the PAP establishment.

 

In Ms Saw's case, she had, under intense pressure from the public to resign, signaled her willingness to step down immediately after the disastrous breakdown of train services in November last year. How is it then that when she finally decided to do so, the news managed to evade the media for an entire month?

 

Similarly, Messrs Ng's and Lim's arrests managed to avoid media detection for more than a month. One was the chief of a police outfit that deals with the underworld of drugs and the other charged with responsibility of saving lives during emergencies and disasters.

 

Yet, the Prime Minister's Office managed to shield the news from the public for such a long time. Or was it a case where the Singapore Press Holdings and MediaCorps were briefed about the developments but were instructed not to publish the stories until a later and more convenient time.

 

Either way, Singaporeans were done a terrible disservice. In this day and age, it is important that society is kept informed of goings-on as soon as they happen. Transparency is the key word. Hoarding information by the state is a dangerous game to play and could lead to serious consequences for the country.

 

But why was the news withheld? One big, highly charged issue that took front and centre of the political stage during this period was the ministerial pay. The PAP was already having a difficult persuading Singaporeans of its reasons for paying ministers the high salaries.

 

The botched handling of the train breakdowns made it impossible for the Government to portray itself as competent and efficient. Ms Saw's resignation, if announced before the release of Gerard Ee's Committee to Review Ministerial Salaries, would have reinforced the public's view that the ministers do not deserve their huge salaries. Hence, the announcement of her resignation news on 6 January

[Wt_know]

applause ... clap clap lap ...

Edited January 26, 2012 by Wt_know

[Trebuchet]

  On 1/26/2012 at 2:52 PM, Relacklabrudder said:

Why the delay in reporting news of such magnitude?

Thursday, 26 January 2012

Singapore Democrats

 

Ms Saw Phaik Hwa made her decision to resign as SMRT CEO on 7 December 2011 but the public only came to know about it one month later on 6 January 2012.

 

Central Narcotics Bureau Director Ng Boon Gay was arrested in December last year and Singapore Civil Defence Force chief Peter Lim on 4 January this year for unspecified wrongdoing. But the news was kept from the public for until now.

 

The news were not run-of-the-mill stories; they involved incompetence and wrongdoing that ran at the highest reaches of the PAP establishment.

 

In Ms Saw's case, she had, under intense pressure from the public to resign, signaled her willingness to step down immediately after the disastrous breakdown of train services in November last year. How is it then that when she finally decided to do so, the news managed to evade the media for an entire month?

 

Similarly, Messrs Ng's and Lim's arrests managed to avoid media detection for more than a month. One was the chief of a police outfit that deals with the underworld of drugs and the other charged with responsibility of saving lives during emergencies and disasters.

 

Yet, the Prime Minister's Office managed to shield the news from the public for such a long time. Or was it a case where the Singapore Press Holdings and MediaCorps were briefed about the developments but were instructed not to publish the stories until a later and more convenient time.

 

Either way, Singaporeans were done a terrible disservice. In this day and age, it is important that society is kept informed of goings-on as soon as they happen. Transparency is the key word. Hoarding information by the state is a dangerous game to play and could lead to serious consequences for the country.

 

But why was the news withheld? One big, highly charged issue that took front and centre of the political stage during this period was the ministerial pay. The PAP was already having a difficult persuading Singaporeans of its reasons for paying ministers the high salaries.

 

The botched handling of the train breakdowns made it impossible for the Government to portray itself as competent and efficient. Ms Saw's resignation, if announced before the release of Gerard Ee's Committee to Review Ministerial Salaries, would have reinforced the public's view that the ministers do not deserve their huge salaries. Hence, the announcement of her resignation news on 6 January

[Cerano]

please elaborate. what is wrong about that?

[Tigerwoods]

If this delay tactic is true, then it's an affirmation to all of us that money matters matters a lot...

[Expertz]

i think that big news like those should be delayed to analyze the impact before the release

imagine what would happen if news break out that our country is in debt like greece?

we have 5 million people now, if at any 1 time 20% of the population choose to riot, even tanks won't be able to restore calm

 

don't forget that of the 5 million population 50% of which are foreigners who are used to riots and mass demostrations

of that 50% probably 30% come from PRC where they stick together like brothers, all it takes for a riot to happen is 1 PRC to call injustice

[Latio2005A]

On this, SDP shd use a bit of its brain,

 

investigation is on going. It is not helpful to make public until the case is wrapped up.

[Trebuchet]

  On 1/26/2012 at 3:22 PM, Cerano said:

please elaborate. what is wrong about that?

 

Simple, SDP is deploying populist propaganda tactics self-servingly. Does it matter if SMRT's reputation is preserved or if CNB's and SCDF's rep damaged as a result of their heads' misbehaviour? They aren't the government. They are just branches of it. It doesn't mean that drug smugglers get off death row or SCDF stops sending out fire engines to save people.

 

And then, in such large corporations/orgs there's always a firewall between the internal affairs and the media. There is always, always always an attempt to filter out potential news from the media - free or otherwise.

 

Even if a free and unoppressed media is to learn about these supposed "stepdowns" and "improper behaviours" the most that these media can do is to publish a speculative report along the lines of "omygosh, what is happening?"

 

Said media would open itself up to gag lawsuits and censure from future events. So who does SDP propose will bankroll such an media operation?

 

Instead with this report, SDP is proposing a tabloid-style press like in the UK where any accusation can be made about anyone in power or who has influence. Is that really the kind of media that is desirable?

 

And if you read it line for line, SDP's tone smacks of the indignation faced by frustrated aunties and neutered uncles. Is that how they want to present themselves?

 

They want to kick up a big fuss about a corporations' reluctance to embaress themselves in public, but they're okay with taking every advantage of it?

 

 

Just typical of their style of politicking... there's a reason why people don't like SDP's style, yea... always coming in from the "right" read-odd angles, never once making a punch we can put our weight behind ...

 

 

[Ender]

These few days SDP whine alot, getting sick of it. Feel they are just opportunistic, taking advantage of the situation.

[Relacklabrudder]

not populist, it u read it, the gist is that the delay coincide with salary review, meaning normally for such earth shattering news, ST normally dun delay but tis time they delay more than month, SDP suspect it is due to the inconvenience the news present to miw during parliamentary debate

Edited January 26, 2012 by Relacklabrudder

[Trebuchet]

  On 1/26/2012 at 3:53 PM, Ender said:

These few days SDP whine alot, getting sick of it. Feel they are just opportunistic, taking advantage of the situation.

 

Ironically they are just using LKY's tactics - threatening us with doom and gloom if we do not "repent" and vote for them.

 

When will they come up with a fresh and original way to win hearts? They have tried the right-wing and now they are reaching out for the auntie-wing

[Trebuchet]

  On 1/26/2012 at 4:00 PM, Relacklabrudder said:

not populist, it u read it, the gist is that the delay coincide with salary review, meaning normally for such earth shattering news, ST normally dun delay but tis time they delay more than month, SDP suspect it is due to the inconvenience the news present to miw during parliamentary debate

 

Yes bro but no sane newspaper editor / law department would let them publish a "rumour" that a CEO had offered to step down ya... think about it... would you publish this at such a sensitive time?

 

So in your eyes SDP has made a valid argument?

 

Or what? If it's your job on the line... you make that call... an offer to step down that the CEO can deny anytime... with the salary review weighing on your readership...

 

I tell you what you'll do... you'll wait a bloody month or so until said CEO confirms stepping down, tio boh?

[Cerano]

  On 1/26/2012 at 3:38 PM, Trebuchet said:

Simple, SDP is deploying populist propaganda tactics self-servingly. Does it matter if SMRT's reputation is preserved or if CNB's and SCDF's rep damaged as a result of their heads' misbehaviour? They aren't the government. They are just branches of it. It doesn't mean that drug smugglers get off death row or SCDF stops sending out fire engines to save people.

 

And then, in such large corporations/orgs there's always a firewall between the internal affairs and the media. There is always, always always an attempt to filter out potential news from the media - free or otherwise.

 

Even if a free and unoppressed media is to learn about these supposed "stepdowns" and "improper behaviours" the most that these media can do is to publish a speculative report along the lines of "omygosh, what is happening?"

 

Said media would open itself up to gag lawsuits and censure from future events. So who does SDP propose will bankroll such an media operation?

 

Instead with this report, SDP is proposing a tabloid-style press like in the UK where any accusation can be made about anyone in power or who has influence. Is that really the kind of media that is desirable?

 

And if you read it line for line, SDP's tone smacks of the indignation faced by frustrated aunties and neutered uncles. Is that how they want to present themselves?

 

They want to kick up a big fuss about a corporations' reluctance to embaress themselves in public, but they're okay with taking every advantage of it?

 

 

Just typical of their style of politicking... there's a reason why people don't like SDP's style, yea... always coming in from the "right" read-odd angles, never once making a punch we can put our weight behind ...

 

 

bro i dont think its opportunistic or self serving. I see it as being representative of the people's views rather than a neutered, sugar coated rub at the authorities which many other parties use. Like a muzzled-dog.

 

I think such a view is definitely good as its just saying what everyone is thinking but not actually pointing on.

 

Meanwhile too, i believe in a free press

 

As long as they are reporting the truth be it speculative or otherwise

Edited January 26, 2012 by Cerano

[Relacklabrudder]

  On 1/26/2012 at 4:05 PM, Trebuchet said:

Yes bro but no sane newspaper editor / law department would let them publish a "rumour" that a CEO had offered to step down ya... think about it... would you publish this at such a sensitive time?

 

So in your eyes SDP has made a valid argument?

 

Or what? If it's your job on the line... you make that call... an offer to step down that the CEO can deny anytime... with the salary review weighing on your readership...

 

I tell you what you'll do... you'll wait a bloody month or so until said CEO confirms stepping down, tio boh?

 

 

Ok, wat SDP is saying is that it is not rumor but from the date that confirm step down officially announced in board meeting to making it on news, it take so long tis time. Same thing about the probe, from confirm probe on these 2 big shots to making it to news. Not from date of rumor or hearsay

[Trebuchet]

  On 1/26/2012 at 4:12 PM, Relacklabrudder said:

Ok, wat SDP is saying is that it is not rumor but from the date that confirm step down officially announced in board meeting to making it on news, it take so long tis time. Same thing about the probe, from confirm probe on these 2 big shots to making it to news. Not from date of rumor or hearsay

 

 

Hmm that's the impression you get?

 

Because then in that case they sure need a better copywriter on their press releases.

 

But you'd still have to realise that a media that reports on all these events as-soon-as is a combative hostile press and won't get much news first-hand.

 

I didn't like today's report that said inflation hit the rich the most, either. But then I'm wise to the ST's tricks and don't see it as new news.

 

They will delay news. They will obfuscate reality. But I still feel that doesn't mean a truly free press is gonna be better. Then again it may not be worse either.

[Vid]

  On 1/26/2012 at 4:07 PM, Cerano said:

bro i dont think its opportunistic or self serving. I see it as being representative of the people's views rather than a neutered, sugar coated rub at the authorities which many other parties use. Like a muzzled-dog.

 

I think such a view is definitely good as its just saying what everyone is thinking but not actually pointing on.

 

Meanwhile too, i believe in a free press

 

As long as they are reporting the truth be it speculative or otherwise

 

Free press? Singapore ranked 135 out of 179 in the world. Don't bet on free press anytime soon

 

http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-index-2011-2012,1043.html

[themagi]

  On 1/26/2012 at 3:53 PM, Ender said:

These few days SDP whine alot, getting sick of it. Feel they are just opportunistic, taking advantage of the situation.

 

It's their style - shoot and smirk. Different from WP who hold back and don't take opportunistic pot shots. Even now WP did not comment on the CPIB probe as they know things are still in play.

[Jman888]

  On 1/26/2012 at 3:19 PM, Trebuchet said:

So wrong, so wrong. What is SDP smoking?

 

Don't applaud that. Seriously.

 

 

Just barking, barking is free