Tan Wah Piow: 154th Played Dirty Tricks on Wreath for Chin Peng's Funeral

[Sammyboy RSS Feed]

An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:

http://www.tremeritus.com/2013/10/13/sphs-dirty-tricks/http://www.tremeritus.com/2013/10/13/sphs-dirty-tricks/

Singapore Press Holdings’s dirty tricks


October 13th, 2013 | Author: Contributions




SPH Wan Bao 23.9.2013 with the caption TAN WAH PIOW
sent wreath of condolence.


On the 23.9.2013, Lian He Wan Bao, one of Singapore Press Holdings (SPH)
titles, carried an illustrated news report about a wreath sent in the name of Mr
and Mrs Tan Wah Piow to Chin Peng’s funeral wake in Bangkok.

The sender, masquerading me, sent the wreath for the sole purpose of causing
me political embarrassment at some future date.

It is clear from international news reports that there were many scores of
wreath sent to the funeral of Chin Peng. The wake was also attended by several
dignitaries and politicians including a Thai Princess, a former Thai Prime
Minister and military personalities from Thailand as well as several Malaysian
politicians who went to pay their last respect .

Yet for some inexplicable reasons, the fake wreath was considered newsworthy
enough for Wan Bao to publish the news item.

I first learnt of the offending report in the Malaysian Sin Chew on the 26th
September, and took immediate action to issue my denial and clarification. The
editorial staff at the Sin Chew Daily kindly received me at their office on the
27th, and carried my interview and part of my statement in their Saturday 28th
Sept edition. They had generously provided me a space larger than the original
offending news story, and placed it prominently as the first news item in the
appropriate inside page. Sin Chew had ensured that the reporting of my denial
was noticed by their readers. That indeed was the case as I subsequently
received calls from friends in Malaysia who read the interview.


Malaysian Sin Chew Daily 28.9.2013 “Tan Wah Piow: I did
not send the wreath to Chin Peng” - Sin Chew had generously provided a space
larger than the original offending news story and placed it prominently as the
first news item in the inside page. It had ensured that the reporting of Tan Wah
Piow's denial was noticed by its readers.


One would expect Wan Bao to be aware of the existence of my interview in the
28th September edition of Sin Chew because Wan Bao’s first report of the 23rd
September was lifted from the Malaysian paper. If it was a genuine oversight on
their part, it may still be understandable and excusable.

On 4th October, I emailed the editor of Wan Bao to raise my concerns,
provided the editor with my full statement, and a copy of the Sin Chew Daily. I
had specifically requested that my denial should be given the same degree of
prominence as in the first report, and with at least similar column space as in
the Sin Chew.

To my pleasant surprise, I received an email from Wan Bao editor on Monday
7th October informing me that a clarification was published. I was elated. At
least something has changed in Singapore, I thought to myself.

My excitement was only short live. When Wan Bao sent me an electronic copy of
the report, I could hardly find the said clarification. It was a tiny innocuous
announcement of less than 70 characters tucked at the bottom right hand corner
of a very crowded and gaudy page of news reports and advertisements.


Clarification in Wan Bao 7.10.2013 - a tiny innocuous
announcement of less than 70 characters tucked at the bottom right hand corner
of a very crowded and gaudy page of news reports and advertisements.


While grateful that the editor of Wan Bao, unlike that of The Straits Times
which had previously ignored my communications, was courteous enough to
acknowledge, and respond to my letters, I am not pleased by Wan Bao’s editorial
treatment of my denial. When compared to the report of my denial in the
Malaysian newspaper, the Wan Bao’s respond is dismal.

As pointed out to me by friends who saw the denial in Wan Bao, it was not a
sincere effort on the part of the newspaper to rectify a colossal error of
publishing a piece of untruth to their 412,000 readers.

This episode of the reporting of the mysterious wreath in the Singapore press
is yet another reminder of the unsatisfactory state of affairs with the control
and ownership of the Singapore monopolistic press and media. The pernicious
effects of government control on the cultural practices and ethics of the
Singapore press rooms are obvious. It is one thing for a newspaper to
unashamedly adopt an editorial policy in support of a dictatorial ruling party,
it is however totally unacceptable in a democracy for a newspaper with a
readership of 412,000, to take a cavalier attitude when confronted with the fact
that they had reported a piece of untruth.

I am not the first, nor the last to suffer the embarrassment and damage
caused by untruth circulated in the mass media. But this is only one side of the
coin affecting the individual. The injustice goes beyond the personal dimension,
and into the realm of mass propaganda when falsehoods are deliberately and
persistently manufactured at an industrial scale for political ends to vilify
the enemies of a regime.

The struggle for truth to be out is the story of David and Goliath. As in
this case, the lie was circulated to 412,000 readers, yet the remedial efforts
could at best reach out to only a tiny fraction of the populace. It is for this
reason that in a mature democracy, parliament and parliamentarians are expected
to take proactive steps in devising curbs and control to prevent the monopoly of
the media by one interested party.

Singapore is hardly a democracy, hence nothing can be expected from
parliament. Neither would the PAP contemplate any reform on media ownership and
control. Confronted with such reality, as an NGI, i.e a non-government
individual, I can only rely on bloggers, twitters and NGOs to help propagate the
truth.

As to the question of who authorized the sending of the fake wreath, I leave
it to the imagination of the readers. The truth is out there to be discovered at
some future date.



Tan Wah Piow
London
10
October 2013

VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]











Rating:
0 (from 0 votes)


Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com.