ST please report truthfully!

I was reading the papers about Mas Selamat Kastari (MSK), the infamous terrorist leader, that managed to escape Singapore's Internal Security Department (ISD), with one lame leg.

The headline read something like this,'.....ends months of anxiety of Singaporeans'.

At first this headline seems to be perfectly fine, until I realised something. MSK fled his captors for more than a year!

Further reading of the article found that the reporter had written, 'fled for 14 months' in the paragraphs near the end.

Is this not trying to put the failure of ISD in a good light? HELLO! 1 year plus say 1 year plus la.
Please do not try to bluff Singapore readers leh!

This is perfectly why I chose not to read Straits Times since the last election in 2005!

The headline totally do not match with the content. 14 months is not 'months of anxiety'! It is a goddamn year! (Notice the difference of impact when a year is used, as compared to months)

The ironic thing is that I have to pick up the paper, because of my exams. Rest assured that I will not do it after. I am rather contented with International Herald Tribune, Yahoo and other sources.

_________________________________________________________________

I just want to clarify my stand. Yes, I do believe that ISD is accountable for their negligence, and guys at the top should be replaced.

However, this entry is more about ST's subjective reporting.

Yes, news reporting can never be objective, but in a country like ours, where there is a need to present news in a neutral perspective. This would enable people to think critically, from another point of view.

___________________________________________________

I came across an interesting quote recently, which I forgot from whom and where.

'Democracy will end, if people stop reading.'

I think the person who quoted it, probably is not from Singapore.

Based on what materials are we talking about here? ST? Oh please.

Anyway, Singaporeans are generally not idiots. Many people know about the 'objectiveness' of ST.

Oh yeah, before I forget. I recently got a link to ST forums or STOMP. Usually issues are raised in threads for discussion, and comments can be input. Hopefully constructive ones that improves society.

When I was following a particular thread about Sarong Party Girls (SPGs), it started with object and truthful comments from several people.

That is until it got personal. People with differing views (unfortunately, men in this case), starting arguing in response to each other. It developed into name-calling and childishness.

I was very surprised. People throwing insults at each other over, in a forum by the national papers. I thought they would be mature and exercise some civil manners in cyberspace....but no!
They chose to behave like ah bengs and kids. ST Forum is no different from Sammyboy forum.

Nothing remotely constructive about that. People just want an avenue to vent their frustrations, to boast and show-off. Probably they do not get the chance to do it at work and at home.

What is the point of getting emotional in cyberspace? In a national forum?

Adults behaving like adolescents. Disgraceful.

Ok. That's enough complaining from this adolescent. Back to my books.