The truth in blogs and between the lines

In the TODAY paper, today Wed 7th Jan, these 2 pieces of news were placed one after the other:

http://www.todayonline.com/articles/295973.asp
Locked out of war zone – Israel draws flak for ban on foreign reporters, correspondents

http://www.todayonline.com/articles/295971.asp
Pray for me, pleads blogger – Civilians have taken it upon themselves to record ongoing battle for Netizens worldwide

In light of the recent debate on the reliability and effectiveness of bloggers as news journalists (http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/01/disgrace-the-life-and-times-of-chua-lee-hoong/) , I do believe that The TODAY Paper is trying to make a point, simply by placing these 2 articles next to each other :

The implicit message here is that bloggers as news journalists are incredibly important, and at times, can be the sole sources of the truth. Yes, one blog alone may be a questionable source of the truth, but when you hav 100 blogs giving independant and corroborative accounts, I think the reliability of this collective testimony is stronger than anything a good news paper can ever come up with.

Bear in mind that even the best of journalists are still human, and hence subject to human bias, and their accounts are still from a single person’s point of view. Bear in mind also, that no print media can ever publish 100 independant testimonies, like the internet can. Bear in mind, that the print media is subject to control and censorship, in ways that the internet can get away with.

While the underlying message from The TODAY Paper is stems solely from my (perhaps over active, imaginative) interpretation, I do think that there are times, the print media is restricted from outright making an overt statement on certain issues. I think that sometimes, we have to look at the way news articles are placed and juxtaposed, and read between these lines. This is not the first instance this tactic is employed. I believe that the paper might have been doing the same, when I wrote this blog post : http://mathialee.wordpress.com/2008/11/15/how-is-life-valued-in-court/I myself have tried a hand at this tactic in my recent post : http://mathialee.wordpress.com/2009/01/05/justice_law_courts/
Sometimes this is necessary, when one is not allowed to say certain things outright.

Because the common man has become the reporter of his own truth, and because the common man is not as sophisticated at language use as professional journalists are, we have to start looking out for the truths amongst ugly complaints, comments, and even offensive statements. We need to find out the truth and facts that have made the comon man so angry.

To reinterate my previous point once again from http://mathialee.wordpress.com/2009/01/03/freedom-of-expression-offense-and-anger/
:
PN Balji was of the view that the online news blogs today could not challenge that of the mainstream news providers, and was not likely to do so in the near future. The way I see it, if we are going to measure the success of the online media according to the same standards and criteria used to measure mainstream news providers, perhaps he would be right.

But that’s not the strength of the internet. The internet decentralizes power, takes it out of the hands of the elite few, and distributes this power into the hands of each of the millions. With the internet, talented journalists that Balji calls for, may no longer be needed. When something happens to you, you no longer need to wait for a talented journalist to tell the world your story – you can do it yourself. And if everyone involved in your situation does so, we would have the same story told from a hundred different angles, and the reader will be the determiner of the truth. No longer do we have to hear only one or two reporters’ version of the story, with all the bias – with the internet, the ideals of many many independent news providers are achieved , because everyone can now be a news provider.

Value of a nation, value of a person

I really love this comment to my earlier post ( http://mathialee.wordpress.com/2009/01/05/justice_law_courts/ ) , made by a person goin by the pseudonym “Peguin”. I think it deserves a post all to itself, and I’ll respond in my next post. Lovely stuff. Sorry if my title is sucky. (Disclaimer: the views expressed in this post are solely Penguin’s and any similarities to mine are purely co-incidental. My sentiments also do not entirely overlap with Penguin’s, i just find it very well argued.)

I share your concerns of outrightly saying anything against the judicial/legal system here (as you mentioned in your comments in the freedom of expression post), but perhaps not so much out of fear than of self-preservation.

Most of the times, I disagree with the “don’t-be-hero” fear that a lot of Singaporeans seem to whip out at every political discussion, but in this case, it’s truly a catch-22 in that we are aware of how vague our legal system can be, and how capable the judicial system is at interpreting it, but how even such an opinion of mine can be considered in contempt of the court.

Which is why I personally am finding so much frustration in trying to effect change in this country, and why I feel so stifled that I feel like I need to leave this country.

When the government mentions that the only way to truly make a change in this country is from within the government, and as you have clearly pointed out, the only way anyone can have a decent political future is by first being one of the politicians that cause the same issues we which to change, I question the purpose of the democratic process. Why vote when we know fully that the people we’re voting for don’t serve OUR purposes, the purposes of the people?

And with such frustration, in knowing that my government doesn’t value me for my opinions, even for who I am and who I wish to love, but solely for whatever economic and physical (think, NS, or baby-making) value I bring, I can’t help but feel like a puppet, or a tool to further our deluded idea of nation-building.

And so I (and many before and after me), am planning to look for distant shores, elsewhere where we can feel like at least we mean something. Of course only to be taunted with names (oh Singaporeans LOVE doing this) like ‘quitter’. But I am indeed a true and bred Singaporean. I know that Hainanese Chicken Rice doesn’t come from Hainan just as I know exactly what Racial Harmony Day and the 5 pillars of total defence are.

Indeed, you are right with this post. There is an issue with the judicial/political system that needs to be fixed. But there is so much more to this issue than jsut a matter of justice, law and the courts. It’s even more an issue that things like civil liberties. It’s the basic value of being valued by the people whom claim represent your interest. Valued by the nation that you call home and that you’re supposed to feel safe in. It stopped being legal and logical a long time ago, and it’s about time people start recognising how the laws and political institutions in this country affect us deeply as human beings.