December 5, 2009 by admin
Filed under Headlines
Leave a comment
Written by Our Correspondent
Senior Counsel Mr Philip Jeyaretnam had written to the Straits
Times Forum to clarify a mis-reporting in an interview published
yesterday under the “Insight” column.
Mr Philip Jeyaretnam is the younger son of the late opposition
leader J.B. Jeyaretnam who was at one time a one-man fighting
machine against the PAP juggernaut. His elder brother Kenneth
Jeyaretnam is the Secretary-General of the Reform Party founded by
their father last year.
The lengthy interview, conducted by Straits Times Senior
Correspondent Sue-Ann Chia was supposedly on Philip’s thoughts
about his recent appointment to the Public Service Commission
(PSC), but turned out to be about his father and brother.
Sue-Ann Chia portrayed Philip as having reservations about his
brother entering politics and taking over the Reform Party in her
article in the paragraph below:
“After all, his elder brother Kenneth took over the reins
from his father and is now heading the Reform Party.
Asked how he feels about this, he pauses and
seems to struggle for an
answer.
‘We have always respected each other’s choices in life and
we have made slightly
different choices,’ he says.”
[Source: Straits Times Insight, 4 November
2009]
According to Mr Philip Jeyaretnam, his exact words were omitted
from the interview:
“Unfortunately, what I said about my brother, Kenneth, in
answer to the question on what I thought about his taking over the
leadership of the Reform Party, was omitted.
I told the interviewer that Kenneth has ‘embarked on a serious project, and I
am sure he will do a good job, knowing his
capability’.”
[Source: Straits Times Forum, 5 November
2009]
As we can see from the above, there is a wide gulf in the
meaning between the two passages which would have generated
contrasting perceptions in the readers.
Mr Philip Jeyaretnam had stated explicitly in no uncertain terms
that he supported his brother’s political endeavors fully and he is
confident that he will do a good job instead of the ambiguous
stance reported initially in the interview.
He must be surprised that the interview turned out to be quite
different from what he thought about when he was first approached
for it by Straits Times:
“It is a pity that an interview about my appointment to the
Public Service Commission, subsequently billed as being about my
father and brother, omitted my actual response, and jumped to the
very different subject of choices in life.”
It is a common tactic employed by SPH journalists to
deliberately omit, distort and twist the words of their
interviewees to create a desired impression in the minds of the
unsuspecting readers in order to pursue the agenda of their
political masters.
(In all the interviews conducted by the Temasek Review, we
always publish the interviewee’s words as they actually are without
any editing. Whenever we make any changes which may change the
impression and perception of the content, we will email the
interviewee the draft and seek his/her approval first before
publishing the interview)
In this case, it is obvious that the article is trying to play
up a non-existent division between the two brothers by highlighting
Philip’s ambivalence towards Kenneth’s foray into politics.
Actually Philip shouldn’t be surprised as this is not the first
time that the Straits Times has deliberately twisted and distorted
the picture of his family.
The Straits Times often demonized his father J.B. Jeyaretnam as
a “radical” and “dangerous” “maniac” out to subvert the PAP’s
political system during his frequent altercations with Prime
Minister Lee Kuan Yew in the 1980s.
When J.B. Jeyaretnam passed away last year, there was a complete
media blackout on his political career, his funeral and the
candle-light vigil held in remembrance of him at Hong Lim Park by a
group of young Singaporeans.
Soon after Kenneth Jeyaretnam announced his decision to enter
politics, the Straits Times again tried to paint him as a
“foreigner” who spent a large number of years away in
Singapore.
The opposition leaders as well as bloggers must think twice
before agreeing to interviews by SPH journalists next time. They
will not give you free publicity for nothing.
With the new media emerging as an alternative to the mainstream
media, there is no need to rely on the latter anymore to get one’s
message across.
<!-- AddThis Button BEGIN -->
