The Ridge: Not a mouthpiece for SDP
6 04 2008Tan Tze How Kelvin
the ridge news
A NUSSU Publication
April 6, 2008
The National University of Singapore Students’ Union’s publication, The Ridge, has recently come under the attack of the Singapore Democratic Party.
The latter alleged that the magazine and its online news portal to have censored an interview with party leader Dr. Chee Soon Juan.
The interview, by news reporter Kelvin Lim, a third-year engineering undergraduate, was carried out in conjunction with the news report “SDP: Reform the election system” published on The Ridge Online Feb. 4.
However, Lim did not get to meet Chee, or email him directly. The interview was passed through from Lim to Chee via the “SDP Internet Team”. There was little opportunity to verify the authenticity of the interview in question.
Lim’s attempt to interview Chee was to get a better understanding of this event. Not publishing this part of the research process does not equate to censorship. In fact, The Ridge News believes that its coverage of the election forum was more comprehensively and balanced than the Straits Times’ “Activists seek changes in electoral system,” published on Jan. 21.
As a student publication, The Ridge seeks to inform professionally, honestly and credibly. The news team did not receive pressure from the school administration on its editorial decision. The Ridge maintains that it operates by adhering to the practice of good journalism, not to any political power, be it the party in power or the oppositions.
The Ridge is disappointed that the SDP attempted to undermine the news team’s credibility to make a political statement. It is also unethical that the writer of SDP’s article did not contact The Ridge to investigate the allegation, thereby holding a discourse based on an untrue event.
[...] questioned to be “men or mice, woman or wimp, citizen or slaves”. Edit (06 April 2008): The Ridge: Not a mouthpiece for SDP. Refutation of allegations of [...]
Guys, my nick says it all. Don’t let these free speech facists impose their slanted, politically motivated demands on your publication. If anyone in this incident is guilty of violating human rights, it is ironically the SDP who is the one trying to strong arm you guys and infringing on your editorial perogatives and reportorial neutrality.
Don’t let them allow you to be their propaganda mouthpiece the way the PAP seems to expect the ST to. We netizens don’t owe the SDP a living.
To all Singaporeans:
Try posting an unflattering comment about the SDP on the SDP website, IT GETS CENSORED, it doesn’t come out! Talk about hypocrisy.
cheap publicity from other people’s misery. shame on sdp!
Rather than getting defensive, why not explain the reasons, if any, to state why the interview was not published? You didn’t know if the reply was by Dr. Chee, but it wouldn’t have been very hard to verify that, would it?
This post, if it is meant as a reply to the charges laid onto your publication by the SDP, says nothing. A non-reply, really.
And as for the title, I don’t think the SDP is asking The Ridge Online to be it’s mouthpiece, just that its opinion be given a fair go.
Not that I’m a supporter of the SDP, mind.
good on you Kel!
Far Eastern Economic Review was sued after publishing an interview with Chee. The Ridge then does not publish an interview with Chee. Although the two are not connected, I think readers would be quite surprised if any interview with Chee appears in any publication in Singapore. Being accused of censorship in a country that has one of the lowest press freedom rankings in the world doesn’t really strike me as an insult to the Ridge’s editors or the news team’s credibility, but a comment on the credibility of the press in Singapore generally. It is good to know that the Ridge did not receive any outside pressure in its editorial decision-making process. If that were true everywhere, then Singapore’s press freedom index would likely be much higher than it is.
I don’t see why a student magazine should publish Chee Soon Juan’s interview. NUS doesn’t owe him a living.
Furthermore, silly ridge covered their forum and got bitten by them in the end. I don’t think those ingrates deserve any sympathy.
SDP:“Ridge interview with Dr Chee not just “part of the research process”"
Well, it’s not that hard to reveal a interview transcript or address the grievance of the “interviewed” party.
Yeap, no one owes anyone anything, but this is a simple thing to do with journalistic ethics.
[...] Freedom, Choice and a place for my Voice - nussu the ridge online: The Ridge: Not a mouthpiece for SDP [...]
The title “not a mouthpiece for SDP” is rather defensive. Why take it so personally? Censorship does happen in Singapore sometimes. Couldn’t the Ridge have simply stated that it wasn’t the case here? This how-dare-you-accuse-us-of-censorship kind of reply doesn’t sound convincing to me. The little swipe at the Straits Times is also kind of funny. Glad to know that the Ridge is better than the rest of the 146th!
I think that instead of this reply, the Ridge would have come off much better by simply stating that it was an editorial decision, not censorship, AND then published the interview to prove that the Ridge is actually free to do it. That’s really the issue. Since this has generated a lot of attention, why not take this opportunity to actually publish the interview in question? Here, online, without much effort or expense, since it now qualifies as newsworthy. Prove to the world that you are free to publish it.
Ridge interview with Dr Chee not just “part of the research process”
Monday, 07 April 2008
Singapore Democrats
No censorship?
The online version of The Ridge Magazine, a publication of the National University of Singapore Students’ Union, has denied that the magazine censored an interview it did with Dr Chee Soon Juan.
The Ridge defended its decision not to publish the interview because the piece was just a “part of the research process” for a report it did on the public forum the SDP held on election reform in January this year.
It added that its reporter, Mr Kelvin Lim, conducted the interview in order to “get a better understanding of the event.”
This explanation seems to be at odds with what Mr Lim told the SDP which was that the interview with Dr Chee “will appear as a separate article, which hasn’t yet been published.” (emphasis added)
The SDP had asked to be informed when the interview would be published.
Two months later, having not heard from Mr Kelvin Lim, the Singapore Democrats emailed the reporter to find out if the interview had already been published.
It was only then that Mr Lim replied: “Oh, I don’t think my editor intends to use the interview as I had already passed the transcript to him. Nonetheless, please help me convey my apologies to Dr. Chee for having spent some of his personal time for an unpublished interview.”
Clearly, the interview was not part of some research process of a report as claimed.
The SDP is happy to note that the editors of The Ridge guard its editorial independence with vehemence. We also commend Mr Kelvin Lim for trying to get the interview out to his fellow students in the first place.
But given the overall climate of fear in Singapore, including the universities, it is hard to believe that censorship, imposed or otherwise, does not play a role when it comes to reporting on politics.
Would it not be more credible for editors to simply say that given the constraints, everyone is doing the best they can? Censorship is at the front, back and centre of life in Singapore. No media person can say that he or she is not affected by it.
If the editor(s) of The Ridge still has doubts, the SDP is happy to post its correspondence with Mr Kelvin Lim online so that viewers can read for themselves what really happened and form their own conclusions.
—————————————————–
Link:
http://www.yoursdp.org/component/content/article/1-singapore/367-ridge-interview-with-dr-chee-not-just-part-of-the-research-process
“However, Lim did not get to meet Chee, or email him directly. The interview was passed through from Lim to Chee via the “SDP Internet Team”. There was little opportunity to verify the authenticity of the interview in question”
I wonder why CSJ can’t be contacted directly in the first place? Why must the questions and answers be filtered by sdp internet team?
I find it interesting that the campus student newspaper is a mouthpiece for Natasha Monks and the Rakes!!!
Now the SDP says that there is an email exchange concerning the interview, in the spirit of transparency that our leaders have always encouraged, lets see the email correspondence in full so that the university community can decide for themselves about the newspaper supported by our fees/our students’ fees!
Looking forward to some clarity!
Cheers
Paul Ananth
Well, then..
Ball’s back in the court I see.
[...] NUS’s The Ridge vs SDP: Censorship or Editorial Prerogative? - nussu the ridge online: The Ridge: Not a mouthpiece for SDP - director’s blog: Censors Ban ‘Jihad” in [...]