SG Fairy

of what can crop up every now and then in our local political scene.

damn.... and i was just getting all used to the new administration under the younger Lee, thinking, hey, maybe he's not that bad after all.. we've not been plunged into the dark repressive times as some had predicted we would. maybe creativity would still continue to flow and we'll still have some freedom.

and then the govt has to come in and put its ugly mask back on.

and i feel so silly, for having let myself get sucked into the entire PR thing, and i feel so digusted with myself for having thought that things would continue to get better... but most of all, i feel betrayed. like, i had stood up for you, believed you, and now you bring in this kind of shit?????

it wasn't so much the whole attack against Mr Brown that i am upset about. I like MB, but i'm not a die-hard fan - some people are unhappy because they're protective of their idol.

what really, really really really pissed me off was this line from Bhavani in response to MB's column:
It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government.

that is truly, one of the most digusting things ever said by the govt. and THAT, is what really x 100 upsets me.

During my uni days, i took a module on the elements of journalism. our key notes came from this particular book, written by Americans. now people who know me know that i can be very cynical about the Americans' version of democracy. i believe in the 'Asian Democracy' idea because it simply indicates that you cannot force one brand of democracy on every country and expect it to work because every country has a different population, environment, and so on. the basic idea of democracy should be kept, but when you go into the details, i believe that they have to be adapted accordingly to the unique needs of the country.
but anyway, i was really inspired by this book... it really opened my eyes into what journalism should be, nevermind that much of it was in the context of the US political landscape. but the basic elements of journalism are universal.

Journalism is the system societies generate to supply news aka, information. It basically serves the greater public, it has that duty to the public.
that book had gone on to explain that journalism provides independent, reliable information that citizens require to be free, that promotes democractic culture. being an Asian democracy, being Singapore, we cannot expect our media to provide information that's totally uncensored and unmanipulated, but i believe that some degree of freedom should be allowed.

Journalism's first obligation is to the truth, it's first loyalty to its citizens. Lets' not even go into the bit about how the media should be an independent monitor of power, take on the role of government watchdog. we can make up a wish-list, but let's also be practical when discussing the now, the immediate present. there're so many aspects of journalism that i could go on and on about, and i could bemoan on how we lack so much. but in return for stability, i am willing to sell half my soul to the devil and close one eye to the less democratic aspects of our govt, and accept that well, we're an Asian democracy which needs to retain some authoritarian elements in order to ensure our multi-cultural/racial/religious society can function.

but there are some elements of a democracy and that of journalism that i believe MUST be kept, for example, as a democracy we have to have elections - and as the last GE showed, we're progressing. when it comes to journalism, there's one thing i believe we MUST have - journalism providing a forum for public criticism and compromise.

the forum function of the press would make it possible to create a democracy by encouraging the basis upon which democracy would stand - compromise.

of course the forum has to respect facts and not be prejudiced, in order to be effective. it also has to be open to all members of the public. and the discussions have to be enlightening, instead of a turf defence sort of thing. the media should be a place where people can come together, and have thoughtful discussions, challenging people to think.

hence, the media has to bring up issues, issues that interest the public because they concern the wellbeing of the people. of course the media cannot be bias, but it can function as a medium for government and people to exchange thoughts and have discussions.

yet, instead of seeing it as a golden opportunity to properly address the public's worries on the increased cost of living, and assure the people that the government understands and is taking good care of them, what do they do? they immediately come blasting in. and then after tackling mb, bhavani drops in her parting shot, warning the media to bloody well shut their traps.

of course i understand that technically, Bhavani was just saying that the media cannot be bias and champion and/or campaign issues but that the media should be calm, and present facts. but this being the singapore govt that we're talking about here, you have to read between the lines.

where do you draw the line between reporting the situation, and championing the issue that is highlighted because of that situation? i thought that MB was merely saying that hey, we're having problems coping with increased cost of living!! yes, he was being all humorous and stuff, but i thought that humor actually helped make the entire cost of living issue sound less depressing and less likely to stir up people's emotions. people would just read it and go 'haha, funny ah? ya lor, so expensive to do things nowadays, but what to do? haha, funny, tis MB.'

and instead of saying, "yes, we understand mb's concerns and would like to assure him, and the rest of the public that Big Brother is taking care of things", they start shooting him. for goodness' sake.. what exactly was so earth-shattering that Mb distorted from the truth? people do know that cost of living is higher coz people are struggling.

and now singaporeans have lost a voice, someone who would help speak up for them, and let the govt be aware of the daily struggles and worries of the average singaporean.

and the Today editorial team... i do believe that they should suspend themselves, you know. if you're pro-Bhavani's words, you'll agree with me that the team should be suspended because they were the ones who put MB and his column in in the first place. if you disagree with Bhavani, then you'll want the Today editors suspended coz they were so concerned with covering their arses, they suspended MB - they cared more about themselves than their public duty as journalists. they have simply failed the very people they said they would serve.

why have i spent an hour typing this blog post? not coz i have nothing better to do... some people think that politics and events happening in sg is boring and they should not bother. but they should, they have to. because politics directly affects their way of living. as dull as news may be, it affects their lives, and enriches their knowledge. and i care abt how i'm gonna live and make it in sg, the place i call home. i care enough to bother. this isn't just abt one man getting suspended. it's about politics, about journalism, about the people. and if we let this issue just quietly disappear, then soon enough, it'll come back to bite us in the arse.

i better stop before i really do blabber on and on and on