Friday, June 06, 2008
Press Freedom?
For those who are following the news, Nair is now currently on bail.Compare and contrast the stories: CNA and Yahoo!
I can only say that, if Nair has any evidence or concrete proof that Justice Belinda Ang Saw Ean "was throughout prostituting herself during the entire proceedings, by being nothing more than an employee of Mr Lee Kuan Yew and his son and carrying out their orders", there'll be no charges against him.
Unfortunately, a man as old as him is certainly not as wise. (Do I even need to support this? If he is wise, he wouldn't have said such baseless accusations.) What's more, he was a Singaporean, and he was a former Workers' Party candidate!
If the Singapore's opposition party members continue to act in this manner, it's little wonder why people doesn't vote for them (albeit there's an increase). The aunties and uncles may not know what press freedom etc we're talking about, but seeing the kind of 'claims', for lack of a better word, made by the opposition is enough to be a turn-off. For me, at least.
That said, I think the US-based press freedom watchdog Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)'s concern over this case is more 'unwarranted' than Singapore's detention of Gopalan Nair.
1. I wouldn't consider Nair a journalist. If he is one, that is really an insult to all the journalists in the word. Where's the research and objectivity? Enough said.
2. CPJ said, "Freedom to criticise the judiciary is fundamental to a modern society. This case illustrates the Singapore government's ongoing commitment to silencing opposition voices both in print and online."
Once again, freedom to criticise the judiciary is one thing, it's another issue altogether when one attempts to link the judiciary to the party in office, makes personal attacks of the integrity of the judge, both on baseless grounds.
Furthermore, the link made between the judiciary to whatever the government do, true or not, to "silence opposition voices" is weak. It's so faint and ridiculous that I believe any critical reader will be able to point out that CPJ seems to already have made their own 'judgement' to the case. Who are they, judges?
The case here is not for them to judge if we have press freedom or not. They will probably have a stronger stand if they are fighting for freedom of speech instead. If the press is to be made up of bloggers, who are 101% prone to their own biased opinions and incomplete information, I'll be pretty disappointed. (I'm not saying all bloggers are biased and have incomplete information. I'm just saying MOST of us are. Maybe you can go do a survey on how many bloggers search thoroughly for information. I bet most write based on their own experience, supported by their own experience of, e.g., good and bad service.)
And I'm not spared from this either. So, if you have read thus far, do be warned that the above is my own opinions of the issue.
Be a smart reader.
posted by QueenPig @ 9:42 AM
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
