Comments on: Contradiction by Tharman?

By: spyer

spyer — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 10:21:23 +0000

http://www.reuters.com/article/gc07/idUSWLB628120080125
.
I just loved the way he said it.
.
****
He brushed off suggestions that sovereign wealth funds lacked transparency, saying Singapore’s sovereign wealth funds the GIC and Temasek were transparent in their disclosures.
.
“We are quite open about what we do,” he said.
******

By: Kaffein

Kaffein — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 12:06:17 +0000

How oxymoron can the current PAP be? As one of my good friend highlighted to me:

“On one hand, the government pumped in billions into commercial organizations overseas.At the same time, we debate about how much subsidies to give citizens when they need medical care.

Hello??? Billions of Singapore citizens’ money go to investments in foreign companies, then why can’t you err on the generous side and give every citizen more subsidies for medical care? Or better still, why not provide free medical care for your own citizens who loyally served the country, paid taxes and CPF which eventually made up your investment money?”

I rest my case.

Kaffein

By: ah non

ah non — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 05:56:48 +0000

Actually, I thought you brought up a good point. That headline practically means “Gov’t bochap about state funds” - not true and not the right message to send out.

By: saintmoron

saintmoron — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 05:30:40 +0000

How can the GOVERNMENT not ‘be incharge’ of STATE FUNDS?

By: Aaron Ng

Aaron Ng — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 01:33:57 +0000

spyer,

It’s an occupational hazard of doing writing day in day out. Mistakes are inevitable for anyone, including myself. It’s just that with several editors between the journalist and the final publication, it always amazes me how such mistakes are missed. Writers usually have difficulties picking up their own mistakes, which is why writing organisations place several levels of editing between the writer and the final product. But I suppose some fishes do slip out of the net.

By: Aaron Ng

Aaron Ng — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 01:22:08 +0000

Gerald,

Well, you will find funny mistakes in other newspapers too, not just ST. Perks up the morning when you see such stuff.

By: Aaron Ng

Aaron Ng — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 01:15:20 +0000

jonathan,

I think you are taking the post too seriously. It was just a ramble on my part and I’m not hammering ST. I’m just musing about it. If I had meant for it to be serious, I would have done a much longer piece and filed it under perspective.

By: spyer

spyer — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:40:26 +0000

The key here is the target audience for this news article or the headline. I think that ST is using the headline to cast aside doubts about the investments. The majority of the readers who do not go into details of the recent investments. Of course, the few like you will question the meaning of the headline. The target readers will just speed read the headline and form a favourable conclusion.
.
“OK, the government said they are not making those investment decisions, so they are not using our money. Our money is safe …”
.
When dealing with the economical issues, I believe that ST is under “strict guidances” on how to publish this type of news. Those who are in the know do not think that things are so simple. We, of course, know that everyone has their KPIs.
.
When I saw that headline, I was thinking “huh?”.

By: Gerald

Gerald — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 16:36:12 +0000

I think ST editors need to be more careful with their headlines. This isn’t the first time it has happened.

By: jonathan

jonathan — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 15:09:15 +0000

i think you’re making a mountain out of a molehill. and it’s not as if the title of your post isn’t misleading either.