Is the Straits Times above Astroturfing?

This is what is called astroturfing by the mainstream media, especially the Straits Times. The Straits Times in its editorial today was nauseatingly sycophantic in calling on the government to "turf out of consideration astroturfed views when determining policies".

But does the Straits Times genuinely believe that its propagandist organ is above astroturfing? The editorial described astroturfing as a manufactured product masquerading as the real thing: fake mail, phone call or digital campaigns orchestrated to appear like spontaneous "grassroots" responses. Is not the Straits Times answering to this description in its pro-government propaganda to the exclusion of constructive opposition and concerned critics' voices?

The Straits Times seems to be aping the Prime Minister in disparaging online criticisms of the government as fakes orchestrated to appear like spontaneous grassroots responses. Is not the echoing of his master's voice cringingly a form a astroturfing? Right-thinking Singaporeans have seen through the obsequiousness of the Straits Times. There are regular readers of the Straits Times who are digusted with its spineless character and give up reading the trash in the paper going instead to the internet for their local and international news.

It is precisely because of the dearth of genuine news about the political and financial mismanagements of the government which the mainstream media are covering up that there is a healthy growth of the new media to counter this journalistic abberation of the mainstream media. For example it was the new media which provided the news of the recent heavy financial loss of over US $1 billion by the Government Investment Corporation (GIC). True to their obsequious character, there was not a word in the mainstream media about this GIC financial disaster to the public. Although the public were apprised by the new media, there was very little they could do with no accountability by the "democratic" government. Would the Straits Times describe the dramatic disclosure by the new media of the financial loss of GIC as astroturfing?

Hovering over the mainstream media like a sword of Damocles is a body called the Singapore Press Holdings (SPH). It is hardly a benevolent organ but a tightly-organised body that supervises closely any piece of pro-government propaganda that goes out from the mainstream media. Woe betides any exuberant journalist who does not toe the line. The next thing he knows is that he will find his rice-bowl dancing (a Chinese slang for dismissal). To ensure absolute obedience to its draconian policy, the government has installed a former deputy prime minister, who is also the government spin doctor, at the head of SPH. So how can one expect anything but astroturfing from the mainstream media, especially the bombastic Straits Times.

The Prime Minister's Conundrum

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong is reported to have voiced his disdain as to the authenticity of the new media, among other things, at a dialogue with about 100 so-called active contributors to the government feedback arm Reaching Everyone for Active Citizen (REACH) yesterday. He calls it "astroturfing". As the name suggests REACH could not be anything but a docile body and the 100 active contributors could best be described as a captive audience. It could have made a difference if it had included other discerning Singaporeans.

The Prime Minister has pompously cited the Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE) saga last year to prove his erroneous contention of online complicity to lure government's involvement to back one side against the other in the leadership tussle. The AWARE saga was a humdrum association domestic quarrel hardly of any national significance and if the government could be duped by so-called online deception into taking sides, then it could go to show the quality of government leadership or the lack of it.

Perhaps it could have occurred to the lucid mind of the Prime Minister the impetus that led to the evolution of the new media in Singapore. Every right-thinking Singaporean is aware that the sycophantic main stream media, epecially the egregious Straits Times, will only disseminate government propaganda and not any dissenting thesis inimical or unflattering to the government. There is the omnipotent Singapore Press Holdings, at the head of which is a government spin doctor, which monitors closely every piece of propaganda that the main stream media dish out to the public. The current news report of the Prime Minister's salvo on the new media is a typical example.

Can you blame the pent-up netizens for opening up an alternative media channel to disseminate the truth about the iniquities of the PAP government? The Prime Minister will be living in a fool's paradise if he thinks that their online crticisms of the government and its ministers are colluded fakes and are not given serious attention by discerning Singaporeans. The Barisan National in Malaysia is a good example for pooh-poohing their netizens and suffered a severe setback in their last general election when they were hit by a tsunami evidently masterminded by the online citizens. This could not have failed to wake up the PAP leadership to the possibility of a similar tsunami hitting the PAP in the next General Election in Singapore. The PAP leadership was seen to be scrambling to clutch at a straw by sending their seasoned war-horse, the narcissistic Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, to Malaysia under the guise of a fraternal visit to suss out the cause of the Barisan National election debacle as a lesson for the PAP.

The Prime Minister is an astute politician and he ignores the pernicious influence (pernicious to the PAP) of the online citizens at his peril.

The Misguided Heroism of Minister George Yeo

The dramatic exposure of the sexual exploits of the renowned Singapore film producer and director has no parallel in recent Singapore's history. What is perplexing to Singaporeans, especially feminine Singaporeans, is the bombastic manner in which the normally sensible Foreign Minister George Yeo called on Singaporeans to rally behind and support Jack Neo and his family in their so-called hour of distress, arising out of the infidelity and sexual exploits of the amorous Jack Neo.

What people cannot understanding is whether this a a just cause for the Foreign Minister to come out in his official capacity to lend his name to rally support from Singaporeans. True, Jack Neo was in a state of panic and Minister George Yeo was the person he could think of as his saviour when he confided in the minister his amorous predicament before it became public. It looks like Minister George Yeo was suddenly confronted with a grave situation involving his personal friend Jack Neo that he probably did not think through the possible repercussion when he merrily made his controversial public statement rallying support for Jack Neo.

At best, this is a personal matter and Minister George Yeo should have treated this on a personal basis and quietly given Jack Neo his moral support. It cannot be denied that Jack Neo is a public figure but he is caught in a scandalous amorous affair. Would it be proper for a government minister to come out in open support of any other celebrity caught in a similar amorous situation? It does not make the action any proper even if the perpetrator is a personal friend. In Jack Neo's case, is Minister George Yeo not sending a wrong signal to the public? It will be an irony if his robust rallying call turns out to be counter-productive considering the extensive adverse reaction on the internet.

The internet is full of caustic criticisms of the improper action of Minister George Yeo in calling for support of Jack Neo. There was in particular a woman blogger who was especially acrimonious in her lengthy posting. This was not the first faux pas in recent months by the embattled Minister George Yeo. He was caught wrong-footed in the Romanian charge-d'affaires hit-and-run accident investigations when he merely said enigmatically that this was very bad when asked to comment.

His booboo notwithstanding, Mr. George Yeo is otherwise considered a more creditable PAP minister whose discourses in and out of Parliament are of an intellectual standard reminiscent of the brilliant oratory of the late Mr. S. Rajaratnam. He has a bright future if only he can avoid making silly mistakes in his public utterances and postures. Of course this will depend on how long the decadent PAP dynasty can last.

The Somnolent Deputy Prime Minister

Can you imagine anything more clownish than a deputy prime minister snoozing away during a speech by his fellow- DPM Wong Kan Seng in Parliament? DPM Teo Chee Hean was caught by camera. We have just witnessed a clownish spectacle of the minister and secretary- general of the NTUC who said in Parliament that he was deaf to the criticisms of an opposition MP and we are now presented with the comical spectacle of a deputy prime minister snoozing while Parliament was in session. If Mr. Wong Kan Seng's discourse can induce somnolence in Mr. Teo Chee Hean, he can certainly apply for a patent for insomnia cure.

DPM Teo Chee Hean has been given wide publicity as the man of the moment appointed by the Prime Minister to improve national productivity. With his somnolent performance in Parliament, do Singaporeans really believe that he has the right credentials for the important task. When he can snooze off during a Parliamentary session, what is there to give the public the confidence that he will stay alert in his productivity job. As he is also the Defence Minister, is he setting a good example to his soldiers? If any soldier is caught sleeping on his job, how is he going to discipline the soldier? There will definitely be double standards in punishment meted out to the offending soldier.

It may be argued that there may be extenuating circumstances in DPM Teo's case, as some ministers and government MPs found sleeping during Parliamentary sessions is sometimes a common sight, but a deputy prime minister is not a ordinary mortal. He is next in line to the prime minister and acts for the latter in his absence. Can you imagine the prime minister being caught snoozing in Parliament? There will be mayhem which will lead to further deterioration of confidence in the government.

Maybe in the eyes of the government DPM Teo Chee Hean is a minister of sterling character. With his fat obscene pay of $3 million a year he is expected to give a sterling performance rather than be caught sleeping on the job. He is in charge of our Army, Navy and Air Force and these forces look up to him for sterling leadership. Good leaders learn from their mistakes and improve on them. Let us hope that DPM will learn from his experience.

We may not see the end of such comic operas. It may be appropriate to conclude with a famous saying of the Chinese philosopher Confucius: I do not wish to see it any more. (wu bu yu guan zhi yi)

The Consummate Joker

Can you believe your ears when the honourable Mr. Lim Swee Say, minister and secretary-general of the NTUC, said that he was like the little frog in the unheard of fable "kingdom of frogs" that he was deaf to all the criticisms of MP Mr. Low Thia Kiang on his so-called doctrine of ameiloration of lower wage workers. Mr. Lim could have been piqued and embarrassed by the incisive demolition of his painfully-created but not flawless doctrine by an ingenious Mr. Low in Parliament. Credit must be given to Mr. Lim for his ingenuity in thinking up such an unseemly parable to defend his wounded pride.

Is not Mr. Lim acting like a little emperor? Is that the proper attitude for a minister and NTUC secretary-general drawing a fat obscene pay of over $2 million a year out of taxpayers' money to adopt in reply to crticisms. Is he not a law unto himself with the kind of brazen attitude he adopts?

If Mr. Lim represents the overbearing attitude of ministers, that is the reason we should vote in more opposition candidates. The PAP leadership is aware of such a possibility and it is now trying to sweeten the ground to make sure that it does not lose too many GRC's at the next General Election. This is where the opposition parties should close ranks to capture at least one or two GRC's. The opposition can do it if they can avoid disunity and put up some credible candidates. The ground is ripe for them to make inroads especially with young voters who are disillusioned with the PAP government. The PAP leadership is especially worried about the loyalty of the young voters and will be making strenuous efforts to win them over. Probably the die is cast and whatever strenuous efforts the PAP leadership makes may have little effect.

The tsunami that hit the Barisan National in the last general election in Malaysia is a wake-up call to the PAP leadership. But it may not be a similarly hefty tsunami that will hit the PAP in the next General Election. So they are scrambling madly to try to assuage any disastrous side-effect that the Malaysian tsunami may bring. As a result the people are given the spectacle of the much-hyped Economic Strategy Committee's report and the recent so-called bountiful budget whichthe PAP leadership hopes will revive its flagging election prospects.

The opposition should not be seen to be idle. This is a chance not to be missed to bring the PAP down from its pedestal and its arrogance. They should attract more credible candadites, especially scholars like the ones the Reform Party attracted, to represent them in a united stand in the next General Election. Already considerable netizens have called on voters, especially young voters, not to vote for PAP which is a good sign for the opposition.

Everyday Rob People

It's amazing that it takes a witty taxi-driver to interpret the ERP as Everyday Rob People. How this amusing taxi-driver's witticism strikes a chord with motorists depends on whether they are affluent who regard ERP charges as peanuts or they belong to the less afflluent who feel the pinch of the ERP charges. Of course, the government ministers are a class of their own as they either travel in official cars or do not give any thought to ERP charges as they are affluent enough with their obscene salaries to regard such charges as peanuts.

In June, 2008 there was a bright spark of a minister who was also the general secretary of the NTUC. He regaled an audience in a two-hour dialogue with what he thought was his ingenious driving experience of getting car beeps four to five times a day from the ERP gantries which he passed through on his way to and from work and thought nothing of it. What the audience did not realise was that he was a minister drawing a fat obscene pay and the car beeps charges probably did not come out of his pocket. The audience's laughter probably gave him a false sense of security that the audience, or for that matter the public, did not think that he was a joker.

Is the ERP system a boon or a bane? The Transport Minister, who represents the government, swears to it that it smoothens the flow of traffic where gantries have been set up. But does it? You still find traffic snarls in places like Braddell and Thomson Road gantry in front of Media Corp during peak hours. Then there is the so-called double whammy. For example, if one leaves Selegie Road and enters Orchard Road there is a 50-cent charge. But when the same person returns to Selegie Road from Bras Basah Road he incurs a $1.50 charge.

Whether the system is a boon or a bane is a moot point depending on whether it is from the government's point of view or from the motorists' point of view. Of course, It enhances the government's coffers, hence the ERP is called by some people "Everyday Rob People". It is quite widespread and not just the taxi-driver's interpretation. As to the Transport Minister's assertion that it smoothens traffic, he should listen to the uncomplimentary remarks of irate motorists.

Well, no system is perfect. So there is obviously a need for the beleaguered Transport Minister and his ebullient Land Transport Authority (LTA) to straighten out the unevenness of the ERP system. It is likely that the LTA staff have exhausted their ideas and there is nothing humiliating to invite innovative ideas from the public, with monetary incentives if necessary.

The insensitive indiscretion of Senior Paster Rony Tan

There is in fact no tenable defence for the inordinate indiscretion of Senior Pastor Rony Tan of the Lighthouse Evangelism church for his denigration of Buddhism and Taoism in his "miracle service". The pastor is in fact a charming and rational personality normally and exudes charisma in conducting his miracle and Sunday services at the Lighthouse Evangelism church. Attendees at the church were invariably mesmerised by his sermons which were delivered with his inimitable splendor. His genial disposition endears him to his parishioners. He has given so much of his life to the salvation of the seriously-ill who flocked to his miracle services for miracle cures. And this is a phenomenon which has to be witnessed to be believed. Even doctors who had been invited to attend such services were amazed at the "miracles".

Many people were stunned when they witnessed the incredible performance of Senior Pastor Rony Tan on online video clips when he ridiculed Buddhism in his disparaging comments about the religion. There was no doubt that these were insensitive comments which horrified and outraged the Buddhists. There was extensive public clamour for drastic action to be taken against Pastor Tan including detention under the ISA. The outburst of outrages was something to be expected considering the sensitivity of the issue. But it was up to the government security organisation, in this case the Internal Security Department (ISD), to assess the situation and take a rational view as to the type of action to be taken. In their professional assessment, they considered it adequate just be calling up Pastor Tan for a dressing down for his insensitive comments about Buddhism and a stern advice not to run down other religions in his preaching and proselytising.

Pastor Rony Tan should thank his God to be let off so lightly. He has posted an apology on the church's website, promising to respect other faiths and "not ridicule them in any way, shape and fashion". But some diehard Buddhists have maintained that posting an apology on the church's website is a lukewarm effort with its limited readership. It transpires now that TV Singapore has given quite comprehensive news reporting in all four languages of Pastor Rony Tan's apology and this should satisfy any lingering doubts as to the pastor's sincerity. Even DPM Wong Kan Seng has expressed his satisfaction with the final development.

Both the Singapore Buddhist Federation and the Singapore Taoist Federation have shown magnanimity in their response to this issue. This unfortunate polemic should now be considered closed.