Journalists in Singapore are getting increasingly frustrated with government press controls, according to leaked US Embassy cables
The latest batch of confidential US diplomatic cables released by anti-secrecy website Wikileaks has revealed that a growing number of Singapore journalists were getting frustrated by press controls imposed by the ruling People’s Action Party government.
The diplomatic cables confirmed that there was a growing disconnect between younger journalists and their editors. The younger journalists, who possess strong journalistic ideals, are turning their sights to overseas postings and possibly overseas jobs because they find that they are not able to express themselves freely when writing about Singapore news.
The cables also quoted a senior Singapore Press Holdings staff member as saying that SPH editors were all hand-picked by the PAP government, and trained for years to tow the party line. In fact, editors often receive calls from overzealous ministers who were anxious to ensure that a story comes out in a particular way.
The Singapore press has been tightly controlled since the PAP came into power through the use of the draconian Newspapers and Printing Presses Act. Singapore Press Holdings, which is the leading publisher of newspapers in Singapore, has been chaired by a succession of PAP loyalists and stalwarts, including former President S R Nathan, former cabinet minister Lim Kim San, and most recently by current President Tony Tan.
The full text of the leaked cable is as follows:
C O N F I D E N T I A L SIPDIS STATE FOR EAP - M. COPPOLA NEW DELHI FOR J. EHRENDREICH E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/14/2029 TAGS: PGOV SOCI PREL SN SUBJECT: JOURNALISTS FRUSTRATED BY PRESS CONTROLS REF: A. SINGAPORE 1143 ¶B. SINGAPORE 1067 Classified By: By DCM Daniel Shields for reasons 1.4 (b and d). ¶1. (C) Summary: Singapore journalists say they are increasingly frustrated with GOS-imposed limits on their domestic reporting. Political leaders put pressure on the Straits Times (ST) staff to ensure that the paper's domestic coverage follows the government line. Reporters say they are eager to produce more investigative and critical reporting, but they are stifled by editors who have been groomed to tow the line. Some reporters seek an outlet for their journalistic passions by serving as overseas correspondents, where ST allows reporters much greater latitude; others consider plying their trade elsewhere. Given that media restrictions are no greater now than in the past, reporters' increasing frustration may reflect this generation's rising expectations. End Summary. ¶2. (C) Comment: The traditional media in Singapore are certainly no more restricted today than they have ever been, and other than on race and religion, online speech is generally unrestricted. That raises the question why reporters seem to be complaining more, or at least more openly. We suspect this reflects in part a generational shift; younger Singaporeans are accustomed to having more latitude, and it likely grates on reporters not to be able to say in print the kind of things people routinely say in cafes or online. It may also be that the leaderships, own frequent suggestions of the need for (incremental) political reforms may be raising expectations that so far have not been met. End Comment. Government Ensures Positive Local Press Coverage --------------------------------------------- ---- ¶3. (C) Singapore journalists tell us they are increasingly frustrated with the obstacles they face in reporting on sensitive domestic issues. Reporters have to be careful in their coverage of local news, as Singapore's leaders will likely come down hard on anyone who reports negative stories about the government or its leadership, Chua Chin Hon (strictly protect), the new Straits Times (ST) U.S. Bureau Chief (former China Bureau Chief) told Poloff January 6. There is a growing disconnect between ST's reporters and its editors, with the reporters wanting to do more investigative and critical stories than the editors will allow. Chua lamented that the ST editors have all been groomed as pro-government supporters and are careful to ensure that reporting of local events adheres closely to the official line. Chua said that unless one of the editors is a "Trojan Horse," someone that for years has successfully concealed any non pro-government leanings, none of them has the courage to publish any stories critical of the government. ¶4. (C) The government exerts significant pressure on ST editors to ensure that published articles follow the government's line, Chua said. In the past, the editors had to contend only with the opinions of former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew (now Minister Mentor) and former Deputy Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong (now Senior Minister). However, a younger generation of government ministers is now vying for future leadership positions and one way for them to burnish their credentials with the old guard is to show they can be tough with the media, Chua said. As a result, several current ministers and second ministers (Chua did not say which ones) routinely call ST editors to ensure that media coverage of an issue comes out the way they want it. While Chua admitted that he knew of no editors who had been fired or otherwise punished for printing articles critical of the government, he said that is because all of the them have been vetted to ensure their pro-government leanings. ¶5. (C) Chua speculated that while Lee's eventual passing may encourage the media to open up, the current crop of ST staff would only dare to buck the government's line if it were clear that the majority of Singaporeans were already opposed to the government's policy. Even then, the media would tread carefully as the government has an established track record of using the press, the ST in particular, to shape public opinion. ¶6. (C) Chua admitted that domestically focused ST articles SINGAPORE 00000061 002 OF 002 often read like Public Service Announcements. Chua noted that how the government intends to push a certain policy is often foreshadowed by extensive media coverage (published before the official policy announcements). As an example, Chua pointed to the government's recent decision to assist retirees who lost investments in "mini-bonds" following the collapse of Lehman Brothers (ref A). That decision followed a spate of media coverage casting the retirees, plight in sympathetic terms. ¶7. (C) In contrast to the informal restrictions placed on domestic reporting, ST reporters are given wide latitude in their coverage of international events. Chua said he enjoyed a great deal of freedom during his stint as ST's China Bureau Chief, and he expects to enjoy similar freedom during his new assignment as U.S. Bureau Chief. However, due to the expectations placed on editors, Chua said he would likely never advance higher up the ladder at ST. ST Reporter Confirms Local Media Restrictions --------------------------------------------- ¶8. (C) Lynn Lee (strictly protect), a reporter for ST, confirmed the disconnect between editors and reporters. Lee highlighted the internal debate over the amount of coverage that the paper would dedicate to opposition icon J.B. Jeyaretnam (JBJ) following his death in September 2008. Lee said that while the editors agreed with reporters' demand for extensive coverage of JBJ political career and funeral (ref B), they rejected reporters' suggestions to limit the amount of coverage devoted to (relatively long) eulogies provided by Singapore's leaders. The leaders' statements took up a significant portion of the allotted space, Lee lamented. ¶9. (C) Lee also admitted that reporters practice self-censorship. Recalling the case of a journalist in Malaysia who was arrested for reprinting a politician's racially charged comments, Lee noted she would never write about any racially sensitive issues. However, self-censorship is not really needed as most censorship is done by the editors, Lee said. Lee, who is now one of ST's Indonesia correspondents, echoed Chua's comments about having greater freedom to report stories (without censorship) while abroad. Highlighting her discouragement with her life as a Singapore journalist, Lee said she considers her current Indonesia assignment as a one-year test case that will determine whether or not she stays in the profession. Novice Journalists Also Wary of System -------------------------------------- ¶10. (C) Singapore's journalism students think twice about building careers at home in the first place, according to online student journalist Chong Zi Liang (strictly protect). Chong and two classmates in the journalism school at Nanyang Technological University started their own online newspaper, The Enquirer, to write free of editorial interference after the existing University-funded student newspaper refused to cover a campus visit by opposition politician Chee Soon Juan. When asked how he would reconcile his journalistic ideals with the realities of a career in Singapore, Chong told Poloff that he feared it would be too "stifling" to remain here. Instead, he foresaw spending one or two apprentice years here before working somewhere else. Many of Chong's journalism-school classmates think the same way, he said.
The majority of my friends from the older generation no longer subscribe to Shit Times. Propagate shit all the time.
Just wonder if my reading preferences reflect that of others.
For news, foreign online news first with Shit Times last (news on local politics bypassed) or not at all.
With Shit Times, you really dont know how much government interference or involvement there is but is certainly there even in innocuous sounding stories.
Since Straits Times is tightly controlled by PAP’s minister and all its editors are groomed by PAP as indicated in wikileaks. We need a 2nd newspaper which can represent the voices of the people.
To Nani,
You can reject it all you like…….But it doesn’t make it right! There must be a press that is fair and that offers a balanced view of analysis. What you have advocated is a subdued press furthering the agenda of the government alone which is what we have now and that is totally unacceptable under the present political landscape.
I completely reject the argument that the press should be allowed to dictate the agenda of political discussion in a country. I agree that the press should hold politicians to account, but this is just one of its roles. The others include being able to explain things to the people (readers) in simple terms so that they can understand. And also, the press needs to educate and inform people in terms of what’s going on and what the government is doing. In countries like Taiwan, UK, Australia etc, the press is usually pushing its own agenda. If they want to see a certain candidate elected, or bring down a certain candidate, it will simply publish sensational stories about the candidate’s personal life. Remember the Clinton scandal and the UK Parliamentary expenses scandal? These stories are often calculated and planned to serve a specific political purpose. This is irresponsible and cannot be allowed in Singapore. Can you imagine if we allowed 3 newspapers, one pro-PAP, one pro-WP and one pro-SDP? Then there would be nothing in the papers except for smear stories about the other parties’ politicians. The press needs to be objective and just inform and report, it should not have any agenda of its own. This is why I think that on balance, the Singapore press is very responsible.
Nani, people are not saying that the press should be allowed to be irresponsible.
But fair and balanced reporting is part and parcel of a responsible press.
A newspaper that is effectively a government mouthpiece is NOT responsible as this is contrary to the values of journalism.
It is clear that the ST has been used by the PAP to further its own agenda. Let’s not make any excuses.
And how are we not a communist state again?
That is why our press is ranked 154th in the world.
It is time to open up the market for newspapers and print media.
No reason to have fake competition between SPH and MediaCorpse.
Mediacorpse, fantastic!!!!
This is nothing new. It has always been an integral part of our system. What do you expect then? To have a free for all press like Taiwan? Allow the press to dictate the national agenda and to create political instability? I would rather have our system, any day of the week.
And there’s nothing new in your opinion either…..Ask any right thinking person, why must there be extremes at either end? Why can’t there be a spectrum of political opinion in the press? Especially so in a more developed society. Some will argue that it is a fair assumption that press freedom can be evolved.
Nani…Nani…
That’s why you are here in these ‘cowboy towns’ right. Serving your master to stop us from being like Taiwan right?
Repeating ad nauseam the policies of the PAP so that we in these ‘cowboy town” do not bring alternative views to the rest of Sgp , right?
So only PAP dominance and rule will be stable right?
Sure, you can have your preference of whatever system. Everyone can have their preference, any day of the week.
Here you go again. I state a view that is different from yours, and immediately I must be serving my ‘masters’. Who might my masters be? Please answer the question. Who is controlling me or who am I acting as a proxy for?
Regurgitating PAP policies? Please tell me exactly where I have done that? I am merely stating my personal opinion. Just in case you didn’t know, there are actually people in Singapore who do not share your extremist radical viewpoints. 60.1% of people in the general election and 70% of people in the General Election showed that they reject radical ideologies in favour of stability. A certain rabble-rouser (who I shall not name) attempted to stir trouble by turning the Presidential Election into a soapbox for his selfish hidden agenda of trying to subvert the system (he even admitted this unwittingly in one interview). Despite bullish claims that he would win, he was eventually rejected by the vast majority of voters. I leave you to draw your own conclusions. I have no idea how you can conclude that 70% of the citizens of this country are acting as proxies and being controlled by their ‘master’.
And that’s all you can offer? Repeating the same old arguments of 60% v 40% voting pattern in the GE? You haven’t answered the very simple question that has been raised. It is clear, as stated by justacitizen, you are only keen on repeating ad nauseam all of the existing current government policies. Could that be because you are only prepared to be coloured in your opinions rather than analyzing alternative ideas for the good of the country?
Message is clear in all the WikiLeaks.
If Singaporeans are to grow (develop ourselves to our fullest potential)
- either we go OR
- they go