Straits Times ducks Chee's challenge

Home

News

Singapore

Wednesday, 12 May 2010

Singapore Democrats

When Forum Editor, Mr Yap Koon Hong, demanded that Dr Chee Soon Juan retract his statement that the Straits Times was unfair and lacked integrity, Dr Chee countered by proposing that the newspaper publish in full the correspondence between the two parties. (See here)

Mr Yap ducked the challenge and would only say that "you leave us no choice but to withhold your contributions to the Forum page."

Below is Dr Chee's repsonse to Mr Yap:

11 May 2010

Dear Mr Yap,

This must be a world's first where a newspaper demands a retraction from a letter writer questioning its integrity.

I have proposed that you publish in full our correspondence over the matter and allow me to respond to it. This will ensure transparency and allow the public to decide who's right and who's wrong. You ducked.

Readers will wonder why the Straits Times is suddenly so thin-skinned about accusations of bias. After all, Mr David Marshall when he was alive had some choice words for your newspaper, words which in comparison make mine sound like a compliment.

The truth is not that you have taken offence at my accusation. It is that you are desperately looking for an excuse not to continue publishing my letters of reply.

How do I know this? In one of my letters I wrote in 2008, you had told me that my reply was too long and that your word-limit was 400. This proved to be untrue as many letters on your forum page exceeded that limit, namely, letters from Mdm Ho Ching, Ms Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Kuan Yew himself.

When I pointed this out to you, you then indicated that it was actually specific sentences you wanted deleted. This gave lie to your excuse that it was the length of my letter that you were concerned about. (See here)

A few weeks later I wrote another reply. At your insistence, I trimmed it down to less than 400 words. You were still not satisfied and wanted me to remove more paragraphs. When I asked what was it that you wanted me to remove, you came up with yet another excuse: That the SDP website had already published my letter and therefore you would not publish it. (See here)

It is clear that you have been trying to find an excuse to censor me and my replies all along. You have invented yet another one: That I have unfairly accused the newspaper of lacking integrity.

This is utterly shameful. But then again, in a one-party state, the media do not know what the word means.

In the public's interest and transparency I will be publishing your email.

Chee Soon Juan

7 May 2010

Dear Dr Chee,

Your reply suggests that you will not be retracting your unfair aspersions on the integrity of our editing in the SDP articles cited in our previous email to you. Until then, you leave us no choice but to withhold your contributions to the Forum page.

Yours faithfully,

Yap Koon Hong
Forum Editor
The Straits Times

Share this article:

Comments (7)

Wed 12 May 2010 10:28 AM | Jufrie - Not only snakes twist and turn

All along people have the impression that only snakes twist and turn.

When when humans also indulge in such behaviour can we safely say that those who do so are worst than snakes?

Wed 12 May 2010 1:32 PM | | ngejay - the lamest excuse

This is about the lamest excuse I have ever read for rejected publication of ALL future ST forum letters. Why can't he just come clean and say, my boss who pays my salary and who draws a multi-million dollar one himself courtesy of Singapore taxpayers hates the SDP, so don't bother to write any more letters.

Wed 12 May 2010 5:58 PM | G_Chen - Empowerment

Actually all these unfairness and biasness we see each day that is happening in Singapore could be stopped or avoided if only each Singaporean are willing to do their small bit in empowering themselves. For example if Singaporean are willing to boycott the taxi service to the Casinos, I am sure the taxi companies would not even dare to charge the $3 levy and in this case, if everyone would avoid buying this poor example of a media, it would definitely force them to act more responsibly. Come on Singaporean, don't just complain and start empowering yourself.

Thu 13 May 2010 1:01 AM | quantum - Empowerment - definition

In fact the whole idea of gambling is never about empowerment. 9 out of 10 will lose money, even though 10 out of them 10 thinks that he will win. Empowerment by your definition, should mean everyone wins, in which case the only way is for everyone to stop gambling.

Thu 13 May 2010 9:14 AM | Kit

@G_Chen

I have not bought a copy of the Straits Times for years. Initial days was tough because of "newspaper addiction". Within weeks, I felt "cleansed" from the propaganda filth. Now I read the occasional evening tabloids for entertainment trash. They can't politicise such trash, can they?

@quantum

I like to think that I win $100 each day I do not gamble :)

Thu 13 May 2010 9:24 AM | Tan Tai Wei

I don't know if this is yet another case-in-point of this.

A meeting among highly paid and entrusted top officers, in the civil service or stat board corporation, over a politically sensitive issue, and the not hidden but openly admitted (but not officially minuted, of course) agenda is not to do the right thing but the political "streetwise".

Such are those who have been "promoted" to "responsible" positions. (If you speak your thoughts when not politically conducive, you are "naive". When you despair and keep quiet, you have "matured".)

Hopefully, LKY will wise up and get to know the many he has put in positions, who could have been "playing ball" with him only, and deceiving him and tax payers in getting their way up and maintaining their positions.

Thu 13 May 2010 10:04 AM | Buwakasha

"Hopefully, LKY will wise up and get to know the many he has put in positions, who could have been "playing ball" with him only, and deceiving him and tax payers in getting their way up and maintaining their positions."

Oh, he knows. He's no idiot, he's a smart guy. He might be regretting it, but he's too proud to admit it. He's hoping that his son can correct his mistakes.