Sunday, July 09, 2006
the "light" touch
"sweat baby sweat baby
sex is a texas drought"
...
oops. sorry. tt is "the bad touch".
the "light touch" is a another thing altogether.
it's actually a pretty new creature. it's only been around since 13 april 2006, when the minister of information, communication and the arts, decided on announcing its existence in this press release by saying tt mica has "always adopted a light touch for the internet".
we aren't too sure what a "light touch" means. we don't really know what it allows.
but everyday we are discovering for ourselves what it *doesn't* allow.
most recently, we have discover tt under the mica's "light touch" policy with regards to the internet (and i suppose, bloggers and other citizen journalists), you are not allowed to publish any article in a newspaper tt criticises a government policy or a social issue, even if you are a) known, and not anonymous; and b) have done your research for your criticism. the reason, as according to k bhavani, the press secretary to the mica, is in his letter to the today newspaper in a stinging criticism of mr brown's earlier column, which as a result got the latter suspended from today.
reproduced here below is bhavani's letter. italics are my own.
"Letter from K BHAVANI
Press Secretary to the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts
Your mr brown column, "S'poreans are fed, up with progress!" (June 30) poured sarcasm on many issues, including the recent General Household Survey, price increases in electricity tariffs and taxi fares, our IT plans, the Progress Package and means testing for special school fees.
The results of the General Household Survey were only available after the General Election. But similar data from the Household Expenditure Survey had been published last year before the election.
There was no reason to suppress the information. It confirmed what we had told Singaporeans all along, that globalisation would stretch out incomes.
mr brown must also know that price increases in electricity tariffs and taxi fares are the inevitable result of higher oil prices.
are you trying to tell us tt, because this knowledge is 'widely available', mr brown publicising and commenting on this knowledge now is... wrong??
These were precisely the reasons for the Progress Package — to help lower income Singaporeans cope with higher costs of living.
...right. this explains why they came out *just* before the election campaign. well. at least they were timed to help offset the upcoming fare and fee hikes.
Our IT plans are critical to Singapore's competitive position and will improve the job chances of individual Singaporeans. It is wrong of mr brown to make light of them.
well, if the IT plans are able to show the results tt they are supposed to be achieving, maybe he wouldn't make light of them to begin with. objectives are one thing - but can they achieve the results??
As for means testing for special school fees, we understand mr brown's disappointment as the father of an autistic child. However, with means testing, we can devote more resources to families who need more help.
oh yes, i'm sure. it's similar to how dyslexics can bypass the normal education system to get into the singapore american school... depending on the other circumstances of their cases.
mr brown's views on all these issues distort the truth.
considering the fact tt his views on all the above issues are supported by facts from statistics publicised by government bodies, i do not see how they can distort the truth, unless you are implying tt the statistics released are in turn... *mistaken*.
They are polemics dressed up as analysis, blaming the Government for all that he is unhappy with. He offers no alternatives or solutions. His piece is calculated to encourage cynicism and despondency, which can only make things worse, not better, for those he professes to sympathise with.
mr brown is entitled to his views. But opinions which are widely circulated in a regular column in a serious newspaper should meet higher standards. Instead of a diatribe mr brown should offer constructive criticism and alternatives. And he should come out from behind his pseudonym to defend his views openly.
firstly, everyone knows who mr brown really is. secondly, are you saying tt as long as one is not able to offer solutions to problems, one is not entitled to voice his or her opinions at all? i see. welcome to the first world nation where there is no encouragement of creativity and diversity, and yet where the freedom of expression is supposedly protected by the constitution. "viva la democracia!"
It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government.
that is true. similarly, it is not the role of government officials to tell the newspapers what they can or cannot print. especially not if those articles printed are factual and are reflective of the citizen's point of view.
If a columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while exploiting his access to the mass media to undermine the Government's standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics.
we already have a partisan player in politics. it's called the stra*tst*mes."
welcome to singapore. this is just the beginning.
and like i said, you *really* want us to smile?
sex is a texas drought"
...
oops. sorry. tt is "the bad touch".
the "light touch" is a another thing altogether.
it's actually a pretty new creature. it's only been around since 13 april 2006, when the minister of information, communication and the arts, decided on announcing its existence in this press release by saying tt mica has "always adopted a light touch for the internet".
we aren't too sure what a "light touch" means. we don't really know what it allows.
but everyday we are discovering for ourselves what it *doesn't* allow.
most recently, we have discover tt under the mica's "light touch" policy with regards to the internet (and i suppose, bloggers and other citizen journalists), you are not allowed to publish any article in a newspaper tt criticises a government policy or a social issue, even if you are a) known, and not anonymous; and b) have done your research for your criticism. the reason, as according to k bhavani, the press secretary to the mica, is in his letter to the today newspaper in a stinging criticism of mr brown's earlier column, which as a result got the latter suspended from today.
reproduced here below is bhavani's letter. italics are my own.
"Letter from K BHAVANI
Press Secretary to the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts
Your mr brown column, "S'poreans are fed, up with progress!" (June 30) poured sarcasm on many issues, including the recent General Household Survey, price increases in electricity tariffs and taxi fares, our IT plans, the Progress Package and means testing for special school fees.
The results of the General Household Survey were only available after the General Election. But similar data from the Household Expenditure Survey had been published last year before the election.
There was no reason to suppress the information. It confirmed what we had told Singaporeans all along, that globalisation would stretch out incomes.
mr brown must also know that price increases in electricity tariffs and taxi fares are the inevitable result of higher oil prices.
are you trying to tell us tt, because this knowledge is 'widely available', mr brown publicising and commenting on this knowledge now is... wrong??
These were precisely the reasons for the Progress Package — to help lower income Singaporeans cope with higher costs of living.
...right. this explains why they came out *just* before the election campaign. well. at least they were timed to help offset the upcoming fare and fee hikes.
Our IT plans are critical to Singapore's competitive position and will improve the job chances of individual Singaporeans. It is wrong of mr brown to make light of them.
well, if the IT plans are able to show the results tt they are supposed to be achieving, maybe he wouldn't make light of them to begin with. objectives are one thing - but can they achieve the results??
As for means testing for special school fees, we understand mr brown's disappointment as the father of an autistic child. However, with means testing, we can devote more resources to families who need more help.
oh yes, i'm sure. it's similar to how dyslexics can bypass the normal education system to get into the singapore american school... depending on the other circumstances of their cases.
mr brown's views on all these issues distort the truth.
considering the fact tt his views on all the above issues are supported by facts from statistics publicised by government bodies, i do not see how they can distort the truth, unless you are implying tt the statistics released are in turn... *mistaken*.
They are polemics dressed up as analysis, blaming the Government for all that he is unhappy with. He offers no alternatives or solutions. His piece is calculated to encourage cynicism and despondency, which can only make things worse, not better, for those he professes to sympathise with.
mr brown is entitled to his views. But opinions which are widely circulated in a regular column in a serious newspaper should meet higher standards. Instead of a diatribe mr brown should offer constructive criticism and alternatives. And he should come out from behind his pseudonym to defend his views openly.
firstly, everyone knows who mr brown really is. secondly, are you saying tt as long as one is not able to offer solutions to problems, one is not entitled to voice his or her opinions at all? i see. welcome to the first world nation where there is no encouragement of creativity and diversity, and yet where the freedom of expression is supposedly protected by the constitution. "viva la democracia!"
It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government.
that is true. similarly, it is not the role of government officials to tell the newspapers what they can or cannot print. especially not if those articles printed are factual and are reflective of the citizen's point of view.
If a columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while exploiting his access to the mass media to undermine the Government's standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics.
we already have a partisan player in politics. it's called the stra*tst*mes."
welcome to singapore. this is just the beginning.
and like i said, you *really* want us to smile?
# posted by Kitana @ 7/09/2006 02:30:00 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
now playing: hotel costes - cafe de flor
A government that does not tolerate dissent: even this. I will not read too much into it. Its not unexpected. Fine.
But then to be cruel?
I felt the response was harsh, sarcastic at times, and almost appear cruel.
For example:
The secretary said
"As for means testing for special school fees, we understand mr brown's disappointment as the father of an autistic child."
OMG: WHy is this even NECESSARY? TRYING TO BE POLITE?
What the civil service first need is not how to respect freedom of opinion and speech in democratic discourse, but to appreciate that to convey sympathy, you can write it in more sincere ways.
For example,
1) Ignore the fact that Mr Brown's child is Autistic.
2) Say, "Means testing is not perfect. It might not cover every situtation as Mr Brown can attest to. However it is ..."
3) Say, "We do not claim to recognize the unique difficulties that a parent of an autistic child face. As a parent, I am sure Mr Brown loves his child. Means testing not might always cover such a situation but there are no alternatives xxxx."
Cruelty is ugly.
B) AND PLEAZXZZZZZZZZZZZZE:
Lines like this are totally screwy:
"Our IT plans are critical to Singapore's competitive position and will improve the job chances of individual Singaporeans. It is wrong of mr brown to make light of them."
There are no such things as plans that are critical. Successful execution of plans are critical. Plans are just plans. There is nothing absolute in the world. To make claims like "IT PLANS ...WILL improve" is exaggeration. Plans alone do nothing. You must execute them. And succesfully.
C) And this is just out of this planet.
"There was no reason to suppress the information. It confirmed what we had told Singaporeans all along, that globalisation would stretch out incomes."
Hmm? Does this line suggest that if they never told Singaporeans, they WILL suppress the information? OMG. The information shld be presented in an objective manner, and reading the
report for myself, I only could conclude:
The rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer, while costs are rising.
This element has been often played down by the government and the emphasis has always been on "workfare" and "job creation". The ugly truth is too hard to bear?
I will also like to know how do the economist predict things will go. Generally, my friends see this continuing. Rich get richer. Poor get poorer. Crime rates might increase. Dissent might increase.
So isn't that a problem? Why are we not even talking abt it? Will saying "Shut up when you have no solutions" make the problem go away. What I know is that suppressing problems will generally lead to eruptions of sort.
And then they ask the young, and the educated: "Why are you leaving?"
- ben
Post a Comment
But then to be cruel?
I felt the response was harsh, sarcastic at times, and almost appear cruel.
For example:
The secretary said
"As for means testing for special school fees, we understand mr brown's disappointment as the father of an autistic child."
OMG: WHy is this even NECESSARY? TRYING TO BE POLITE?
What the civil service first need is not how to respect freedom of opinion and speech in democratic discourse, but to appreciate that to convey sympathy, you can write it in more sincere ways.
For example,
1) Ignore the fact that Mr Brown's child is Autistic.
2) Say, "Means testing is not perfect. It might not cover every situtation as Mr Brown can attest to. However it is ..."
3) Say, "We do not claim to recognize the unique difficulties that a parent of an autistic child face. As a parent, I am sure Mr Brown loves his child. Means testing not might always cover such a situation but there are no alternatives xxxx."
Cruelty is ugly.
B) AND PLEAZXZZZZZZZZZZZZE:
Lines like this are totally screwy:
"Our IT plans are critical to Singapore's competitive position and will improve the job chances of individual Singaporeans. It is wrong of mr brown to make light of them."
There are no such things as plans that are critical. Successful execution of plans are critical. Plans are just plans. There is nothing absolute in the world. To make claims like "IT PLANS ...WILL improve" is exaggeration. Plans alone do nothing. You must execute them. And succesfully.
C) And this is just out of this planet.
"There was no reason to suppress the information. It confirmed what we had told Singaporeans all along, that globalisation would stretch out incomes."
Hmm? Does this line suggest that if they never told Singaporeans, they WILL suppress the information? OMG. The information shld be presented in an objective manner, and reading the
report for myself, I only could conclude:
The rich are getting richer, and the poor are getting poorer, while costs are rising.
This element has been often played down by the government and the emphasis has always been on "workfare" and "job creation". The ugly truth is too hard to bear?
I will also like to know how do the economist predict things will go. Generally, my friends see this continuing. Rich get richer. Poor get poorer. Crime rates might increase. Dissent might increase.
So isn't that a problem? Why are we not even talking abt it? Will saying "Shut up when you have no solutions" make the problem go away. What I know is that suppressing problems will generally lead to eruptions of sort.
And then they ask the young, and the educated: "Why are you leaving?"
- ben
# posted by 
: 7/09/2006 05:54:00 AM
: 7/09/2006 05:54:00 AM << Home
