Singapore Watch

Yk was talking about his new slogan for the language movement, ‘Speak Singlish Proudly, Speak English Properly’. What bothers me greatly is that there is even a need for such a movement. Whose fault is it that it seems there are a large number of Singaporeans who cannot differentiate between Singlish and English, and who cannot switch between them when the occasion calls for it?

Blame the Gahmen? Possibly. After all, we aren’t born with the ability to read and write. That’s what schools are for. But then again, I went through the educational system, and I do not have that problem. I’ve no difficulty switching between a pseudo-American accent, Singlish and just plain proper English like most of what I’m typing right now.

Why is this even so important? Because the very basis of communication, is the need to be understood. Is faking an accent considered being a poser or wannabe? Yes if you’re doing it when you should be speaking Singlish, no if you’re doing it so that you can be understood by the people you’re speaking to.

Maybe it’s because I come from an English-speaking family. Or maybe that is irrelevant. I can assure you, we don’t speak the Queen’s English at home. In fact, I think we speak more Singlish than English, and I only realized that when my stepdad kept telling my mum to watch less Chinese shows, and to not use so much Singlish.

But certainly its not all the Gahmen’s Government’s fault. True enough. I believe that one of the reasons I have a decent foundation in English, was that my parents made an effort in teaching me the basics, even before I entered pre-primary. I was made to read this whole series of 12×4 books called ‘Peter and Jane‘, with each number increasing in difficulty.

I always argue that my basics in English have been pretty much set after primary 6. I attribute a large part of it as a result of being forced to complete a series of exercise from a book called ‘Primary English’ during English classes. Maybe it has in part to do with being thrown out of EM1 Chinese, and made to undergo EM2 English lessons while the Chinese class was in session. I won’t go into too much detail, because then, I would be questioning the educational system in regards to how Chinese is being taught.

Surely someone has an answer to this phenomenon? I personally believe the Singapore Education system is not the best that it could be. I can’t say that I know of another country’s who has a better system. Why can’t the Gahmen pay people to research all the major educational systems, pros and cons, and come up with a better system then the one we have? Or have they already?

Ladies and Gentlemen, if they have, our country is doomed. Maybe you bloggers can help our country out, by listing the pros and cons with our educational system, suggestions on how you think it can be improved, or other systems existing in other countries, which you think might help, if parts of it were implemented in Singapore. Regardless of all my rants, I want my kid to be educated in Singapore. That isn’t anytime in the near future, so maybe it’s time to start thinking about changes. I would happily compile any posts related to this matter on this site, or if Singapore Angle would wanna, it’ll be fine by me.

Let’s get those brain cells cracking.

Not so long ago, Mr Steve McDerott proposed a notion that blogs in Singapore are “skewed towards ‘infantilism’”. While not attempting to refute or support his opinion, a more neutral alternative will be used to term such blogs ‘social‘.

The latest happenings along with a web symposium exposed a number of mature blogs in the blogophere. However, such blogs, given the maturity of the content, are more threatened by legal action, as opposed to social blogs where ramblings are not seriously taken and defamation usually dismissed as immaturity. We have already seen in the past weeks how legal action threatened against one blog led to the closure of several others. It will only takes one lawsuit to cause a domino effect on such blogs in the blogosphere.

Who would want to go through the burden of a lawsuit even if you have a strong defence? It’s much easier to close down and shut up given the mentality infused into us.

Thus following the theory of evalution, if the situation persists, such mature blogs would be killed, leaving the social ones to thrive. And people outside will look in, wondering where all our intelect went to. Such is life in Sg.

With more and more bloggers getting into ‘trouble’, this can be both bad and good news. The bad news is obviously, well, they’re getting in trouble. The good news is that people are starting to take blogs more seriously, regardless of how serious the blogs were intended to be.

Remember those days in college, where you were forced to write those nasty things called research papers? I remember how my professors used to tell me to make sure I use book source over the internet, and primary sources over secondary. Their rationale was that printed sources were more trusthworthy than online ones. (That can be a subject of a totally different debate, but since that is not the topic for today, let’s leave it as that.)

In some sense, printed sources are suppose to be more reliable than online ones. For example, I expect newspapers like the Strait Times to have more accurate information then opinionated blogs, because a company as big as ST will definitely have hired fact-checkers to check the facts in an article before publication. The reason is really simple - to limit the number of law-suits that might occur.

Blogs on the other hand, how many actually check their facts? Considering that most blogs are written as a past-time or as a sideline (ie. free, no pay, you get the idea), there are no fact-checkers to be hired to ensure that everything is true. I mean honestly, online materials usually isn’t treated with the same severity like printed materials are. But obviously, the trend is changing. Blogs are getting more and more attention, both by readers and hunters.

The solution? Blog responsibly lar. But I mean, if you can’t freely say what you want to say without having to live in fear of being sued, then whats the point of keeping a blog? There are too many facts to be checked. If we bloggers had that luxury, we would all be starting newspapers that pay us to do that. There are bound to be one or two items that fails the nonexistent ‘fact-checker’ test.

You could do one of two things:

1) Place a notice on your blog, alerting readers that there is that slight probability that the following content might contain information are not ‘fact-checker valid’. Or if you do read titles, that is my second suggestion.

2) Be vague. This means DON’T MENTION NAMES! Imagine this. If I had blogged this :’a scholar studying in the US, is currently underfire for apparently (< - use of this word is good) posting racist remarks on his blog.‘ Try using that format to air your opinions on another hot subject. You can’t be sued, I don’t think. No names were mentioned, yet most people who are familar with the incidents know what or who you are referring to.

But what if my readers don’t know anything on the subject? Well you could link to the source that ignited you to feel that your opinions on this matter has to be heard. Still, you’re not mentioning names, and any lawsuit against you, is perhaps at best implied.

You bloggers, don’t be afraid to speak your mind. Just please do think before you type.

Okay now for the disclaimer: I’m not a student of law, so take my advice with a pinch of salt. Everyone is entitled to their 2-cents worth. That’s it for my 5-cents worth.

p/s i think singapore is becoming more matured, like the us of a. america is the land of the free, where you have freedom of speech, and all that. american is also one of the places where you get one of the most ridiculous lawsuits. i think that’s where the similarity ends though

Recently, Hui Chieh from ‘From a Singapore Angle’ compiled a comprehensive list of sites that have blogged about the CZ incident in his blog entry ‘Anatomy of a Blogospheric Event‘ , giving any reader who stumbles across his site a very balanced view of the issue. He has since taken on the job of hosting Web Symposiums on current issues. The most current one concerns the Casino Issue, and is titled, ‘Web Symposium: Blogosphere reactions to the Casino/Integrated Resort decision 2005‘

Anybody with views concerning this matter, especially anti-casino views stemming from a religious or pro-family basis, please submit your site there, so that this discussion will be more balanced.

Meanwhile, tomorrow.sg has been created, where they call for bloggers to post interesting articles related to Singapore, kinda like the Singaporean version of boingboing.com

The $100 restriction to keep ‘poor’ Singaporeans from developing a gambling habit is laughable. People who gamble have been known to spend hundreds of dollars on 4D and Toto. What is a $100 to visit a Casino in Singapore? What are the alternatives, if you are a gambler, and want to gamble, but no in Singapore?

Let’s see. Let’s perhaps go to Genting instead? According to Asia Travel, a roundtrip to Genting by coach costs S$60. When you include lodging and food, it’ll well exceed that amount. How about Batam then? A ferry ride can cost between $30-$60. Nah, just stay in Singapore lar. Its still cheaper.

But what if your spouse or relatives submit your name, which bars you from gambling in Singapore, supposedly to save money? Go to Batam lor. Yeah I know the wife doesn’t allow, but it doesn’t matter. Today already reported on Jan 29, 2005, that 90% of the gamblers there are Singaporean, and in some cases, the spouses don’t know. In fact, there was a case where a ‘middle aged man who, after dropping his wife off at work, took the morning ferry to Batam, gambled until lunch-time, had a cheap seafood meal, then a massage and, finally, headed back to Singapore by 6pm to pick up his wife from work. The wife had no clue that he been in Batam all day.‘ [download article: pdf1|pdf2]

Oh wait, wait a sec. Is there really a way to help prevent people from gambling? People have been gambling, and still are gambling way before the ‘Integrated Resorts’ have even set foot in Singapore, let alone been built. And when these IRs are completed, people will continue gambling. The key question we should ask ourselves, is perhaps: ‘Where?‘

Hey but, isn’t that part of the reason why Singapore is building an IR? They want to keep the money that Singaporeans are otherwise spending abroad! *smacks head* Ladies and Gentlemen, to put it simply, it’s all about the money. Even LKY agrees. You see, if he had lightened up before, we would have a Formula One course, and who knows, maybe they would have thrown in legalized bettings on those races eh?

But the Government is responsible. They are creating 35,000 jobs and bringing in tons of revenue for our nation. Yes they know of the social woes and the problems that might follow, thats why, they have all these measures in place. Like Mr Brown says: ‘Only a mature society would have all these measures to help them to remain mature. Besides, Gahmen say we are mature enough to have a casino. They never say we are mature enough to go into one.‘ In fact, if you ask me, secretly I think the Government knows that those surface rules won’t keep Singaporean gamblers away. In fact, I think they’re counting on that, because that’s where most of the revenue is coming from.

“Show me the moneeeey!”

Why stop at gambling? While we’re at it, let’s legalize drugs too. After all, it’s all about the money right? You could tax drug-sales, just like how we’re already earning money off legalized betting. Everyone is happy. I mean, the problems that comes with it, is not important, as we have already established with the IRs. What is important, is the potential revenues it’s going to bring in.

Come on, you wanna talk about jobs? The drug trade creates a lot of jobs. Not to forget, a lot of moola too. And you know what, if drugs were legal, Shanmugam Murgesu wouldn’t be on the death row. The two kids wouldn’t be earnestly trying to save their father. Maybe the government should start dealing with serious issues here, like the reason why Shanmugam even had to resort to drug-trafficking in the first place.

We are a matured country. Really. We can air our views, attempt to make a difference. The Government doesn’t mind you being heard (well within reason), and it encourages that, because it makes them look fair. But you know, at the end of the day, they’ll still make the decision they intended to make. That’s ‘good’ leadership.

The law dictates that Shanmugam be hanged for his actions. Emotions aside, the Government will not waiver on this issue, because this will set a precedence for all future cases to come. Even Bill Clinton could not get Michael Fay off. It would be foolish to think that the Goverment would buckle their knees, for Shanmugam. Keep talking. We’re listening, but honestly, we don’t really care what you think.

The Government no doubt has done many great things for us Singaporeans. I think its time they start reconsidering their priorities though, and start revamping their policies.

What is this country coming to.