The media tick off
After being unleashed for a few weeks to write partisan articles and comments on the Aware saga, Kan Seng has finally spoken to take the media to task for their less than proper reporting that were found wanting in some areas. It was so stark that the reporting was one sided, with journalists and reporters taking sides in the sorry and deplorable episode. Where was the professionalism to be impartial and objective? Why were they unleashed for so long to make those kinds of reports? Beats me. Someone behind the scene pushing some agenda? And no one knew that this was happening and everyone behaved like the 4 probervial monkeys! The impact was so fierce that the conservatives were in some way cowed to oblivion and afraid to make their stand on the issue of homosexuality. Or was it that the conservative views were not given a chance to be aired, not given any space in the media? Why was the media ending up like that, that it appeared to be serving the interests of some groups? I have read several letters of despair by the conservatives to the church and to Hsien Loong, calling for fairer and more objective reporting. And you can only read them in cyberspace, through emails and blogs. This highlighted how important cyberspace has become to provide a more balanced view of issues when TOM failed to do its job in impartiality. And look at the amount of postings on the NMP nominations! Again it is the netizens that are taking the lead to voice their concerns. This you cannot find in TOM. And TOM is now reporting the happenings and the numerous concerns of the netizens postings in blogs and in Reach. Why was there an absence of such letters of concerns in the TOM? The cyberspace and netizens are speaking out. Bloggers and netizens know that only in cyberspace can they expressed fully what their views were and be heard.