The Home section of the Straits Times today had a story on the first page of the section (after the Kaplan advertisement) titled “Ex-MP may be charged for not disclosing business stake”.

The editors clearly think that it’s an important story, thus putting it on the front page. However, when I read the report, there was absolutely NO mention of who the MP was. The report merely listed the business interests of the person, as well as saying that the ex-MP served four terms of parliament.

This is really interesting because I don’t see a reason why the ex-MP should not be named. I can understand that people cannot be named if the case is still under police investigation. However, the article never mentioned that. So, why the secrecy over the name of the ex-MP? The few exceptions I can accept for not publishing names are cases like rape, child molest etc because it’s bad enough that the victims suffered such grief against their will, and the last thing that they need is more spotlight on their grief.

What I don’t understand is why a four term ex-MP cannot be named. Chances are, the ex-MP was a member of the PAP. I cannot help but wonder if that is the reason why ST did not publish the name of the ex-MP. And, considering that it’s a four term MP, that person must be pretty high-profile. Perhaps it’s a bad time to disclose names given the current public unhappiness with the PAP dominated government.

Whatever the reason, I don’t think it’s good journalistic practice. A first-class country without a first-class newspaper. :sad: