By Helen Ang
_____________________________
Today March 24 marks the start of our dedicated Boycott Week; so this one is for theSun.
On March 7, the eve of polling day, theSun carried political ads from cover to cover, prompting a Media Monitor to ask if it were a newspaper or BN pamphlet.
We’ve seen how it sells its front page to wraparound ads, and how their pages are replete with PR-ish advertorials reading like products and services brochures. But the voice of the paper is just as grubby.
Take this editorial on March 4 headlined “Voting for fair media play”. theSun says: “In this election round, the Malaysian Media Monitors Diary … has found that opposition parties received between 30 and 50% coverage in the week leading to nomination day on Feb 24.” http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=20946
What I read in Diary was this: “On average, the six newspapers for which data have been collated had between 50 and 70 per cent stories that portrayed BN in a positive light.”
Diary’s BN 50/70 ratio data was interpreted by theSun as a flipped-over BR 30/50 – theSun’s deliberate and faulty syllogism is tantamount to cheating! especially when the paper pointedly refrained from conceding that the exposure given Opposition was overwhelmingly negative.
In the same editorial, theSun insisted it is any newspaper’s “unquestionable right to endorse one party, ideology or political alliance over another”. This paper, however, exercises its endorsements most disingenuously and not to mention, without any élan. Its writing is like muzak, or banal elevator music.
Fine, if theSun wishes to regard BN as “an eminently successful experiment that made our new nation a model of inter-racial cooperation that drew praise from far and wide.” (March 18, http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=21101)
The same editorial proceeds to say: “Furthermore, the scale of human development that the BN had brought to the people in the past half-century puts us in fine standing among post-colonial countries, many of which have skidded down the development ladder rapidly …”
Urm, according to a recently dislodged MCA Deputy Minister, Malaysia’s fine standing was a little better than Myanmar, no?
To cap its traditional and blasé BN blather, theSun says post-election: “So, it’s only to be expected that party leaders are scrambling to pick up the pieces of the edifice that symbolised harmony, cooperation and understanding for so long.”
Malaysians who support our Boycott can rest easy in conscience. If theSun ever downscales, its journos can apply for a job in any greeting card company that would find use for their talent in crowd-pleasing [I hear sunny jingles to the tune of “ebony, ivory, living together in perfect harmony” but I’ve always failed to see substance in its social commentary columns].
Klang Valley-centric Sun has been claiming that these columns, be they in-house or guest, are its unique selling proposition. theSun’s marketing strategy has been to hard-sell its opinion writing, the reason being that the free paper cannot match its priced rivals in terms of staffing, especially in the bureaus to do on-the-ground reporting.
If the paper’s editorials – theSun says – represent the organisation’s highest quality expression and thought, then I’m quite immune to getting a touch of the sun. Nonetheless for those shorter on melanin, please think about slathering sun-protection from inanities like the following: “Where the ranks of the previous BN government were bloated with 41 deputy ministers … there are now ONLY [emphasis mine] 36 deputy ministers.” http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=21109
Aiyah, fortunately I can only count up to 20, that is, the number of my fingers and toes.
However theSun will persuade you that the Cabinet which the PM “can truly call his own with most of the ministers being new faces” is a “fighting trim” outfit. Beauty (like BN’s obesity) is a state of mind but I think you will see better staying out of the sun’s glare.
KevinP
March 24, 2008
sigh….. u start today? I thought it was last week… LOL… I started mass boycott since 19/3/08.
http://www.malaysianjoe.blogspot.com
Kevin,
you start earlier so you lebih jimat, mah!
teohwk
March 24, 2008
I still remember very vividly the PKFZ fiasco that TheSun covered. It was the only newspaper then that exposed the whole scandal on the front page. My hats off to the 2 reporters (can’t remember their names). If they are still reporting for TheSun, my media boycott will exclude them.
Furthermore, among all MSMs, I think TheSun is the grey sheep among all the black ones.
Henry
March 24, 2008
I’ve stopped reading all newspapers since Apr 2006. The “news” that we need is always on the nets and blogs. I prefer the latter cos you bloggers out there actually speak what I want to say..a big thank you to all. Keep going….
joehancl
March 24, 2008
“When will they ever learn, When will they ever learn” goes the song. It seems our MSM will never learn.
Crankshaft
March 24, 2008
Toss over theSunblock, will ya? I’m OFF all mainstream media – at least for this month, if not permanently.
dan
March 24, 2008
I was equally amazed how theSun gave page after page coverage to the BN whereas the total news on the “opposition” coalition would hardly cover a full two pages.
johnleemk
March 24, 2008
I think it’s really unfair to tar all journalists at the Sun with the same brush. Regardless of their editorial policies, the Sun has consistently won my respect for its courage in honestly reporting the scandals nobody else will. It’s anyone’s right to boycott them, but I hope it will at least be an informed boycott. Jacqueline Ann Surin, R. Nadeswaran and Terence Fernandez (to name a few) are a far cry from the inane ramblings of the editorial desk.
shar101
March 24, 2008
Johnleemk,
You have merely scratched the surface of the personalities you’ve mentioned.
JAS’s departure from the Sun to the Edge immediately upon VT’s takeover is clouded with controversy emanating from her last column on 31/01/08. TPP’s HartalMSM committee in fact wrote to the current editor for ‘right of reply’ which did not get published. Equally puzzling was her launch of MalaysiaVotes, an on-line news website, about ttwo weeks prior to GE12 which purportedly was to disseminate news not covered by the MSM. For this purpose, the 3-person team did an extended write-up on KJ. Duh! Their website gets funding from… (ain’t telling but wait for it).
The dynamic duos expose on the PKFZ in mid 2007 was a breath of fresh air that did not last. A key evidence of improper land acquisition is in the hands of one of them which till today have not seen the light of … errmm.. print. Why is that?
Dig deeper, Johnleemk. Yer might get shaded from the Sun long the way.
johnleemk
March 24, 2008
You’ve only pointed out improprieties in the editorial board, and perhaps made a couple of innuendos about one of the Sun’s many good reporters and columnists. Helen’s post tarred the Sun’s editors, reporters and columnists all with the same brush; I don’t think that’s fair. Boycott the newspaper for its loopsided editorial policies if you will, but I don’t think anyone’s made a strong case against the journalists. Refusing to acknowledge the contribution of people like R. Nadeswaran to the state of public debate in the country reeks of blind partisanship.
shar101
March 25, 2008
Ahhh.. it would appear that the demise of consistently high journalistic standards within the MSM is equal to the lack of proper courtesy in addressing a reply within blog forums.
*sigh*
MrCorrect
March 25, 2008
Don’t forget who took over the sun just before election.
fellowmalaysian
March 25, 2008
My conspiracy theory;
BN’s hold onto MSM is not just abt propaganda but $ of course. Anyone knows exactly how much these big companies pay for advert? In return, my guess is, they get free hand in raising prices. Just look at the price of milo. Don’t see the minister saying anything abt it. But look what happened to the roti canai guys? So it’s abt win-win for BN n lose-lose for people.
Paul Warren
March 25, 2008
Johnleemk, you might be right in putting Nadeswaran on a pedastal. He certainly did us all a favour going after his favourite pirates in UMNO, whether at State level or Federal.
However, there is this period of hiatus before the elections and after VT took over The Sun when Nadeswaran disappeared. I think he owes us an explanation. (He may have and I might have missed it) Then on his very first outing after the elections he was barring his fangs of how nasty his bite can be at the opposition even before they could locate the necessary files in the State Assemblies, let alone the various Municipalities which till today are still manned by the BN sanctioned councilors.
Then there is this odd endorsement of Lee Wah Beng. But he forgot to say that Lee Wah Beng failed as a State Assemblyman although he might have done well as mandore to all those drain sweepers and road maintenence people. The fact that he was using the wrong measures just did not seem to bother him. but then again it may not have dawned on him that he was using the wrong measures when endorsing Lee.
raj
March 25, 2008
In the run up to the elections, there was a very strong pro BN content in theSun.
However, I am indebted to this paper for highlighting a lot of things that was not initially coverd in the other papers. Issues like the PKFTZ, Istana Zakaria, the billboard issues in MBPJ…etc. I think journalist like Citizen Nades and Terence need our support to continue doing what they do. I can only assume that they face a lot if internal challenges as well.
In the last week or so,its been good to have Nades colum back and it looks like osme of the shackels they may have had on them are no longer there….but who really knows. I say lets give them a chance and see the standard of reporting over the next few months.
zorro
March 25, 2008
I think we should leave Nades and terrence to do their jobs. I dont believe they contribute to the editorials. Nades was accused by toyo of being a racist at a sun organised meeting. He struck back, without fear or favor. It is OK to hit at the sun, but you cant tar the children (Nades & terrence) with the sins of the father.
Let’s concentrate on the advertisers.Lets not get distracted.
SV Singam
March 25, 2008
I agree with Zorro. There is nothing to be gained by taking pot shots at individuals unless they are the specific ones committing the atrocity.
Just as many people were afraid to vote other than for BN, there are many journalists who are afraid to buck the system. They and others could become victims of our actions, but collateral damage cannot be avoided. Nevertheless, there is no reason for us to shoot at them directly.
Our targets should be those in a position to choose otherwise but, for whatever reason, prefer to lick boots. There are enough of them to satisfy the trigger-happy.
Paul Warren
March 26, 2008
Its about data integrity isn’t it? When tainted, corrupted or adulterated and data loses its integrity, you can’t count on it.
In Nades’ instance he needs to account for the hiatus. No doubt most of us here have heard bits and pieces and probably from the horses mouth too. But surely we all know that that is not enough.
Attempting to guide our thinking about who we should support through a blog or a web site and worse still through MSM then parameters must be agreed upon. You just cannot assume that your measure of good and evil is indeed the common measure used by everyone. This was the failure of many. I do not believe that everyone here necessarily believes that everyone of the “opposition” victors is a worthy victor.
Discourse here clarifies for a lot of us the nuances that make up precise understanding. And I am all for it.
Hear, hear!
Paul Warren
March 26, 2008
The Sun had a popularist slant up to about 3 weeks before elections. Then of course VT took over. But let us be certain about one thing:
1. Certainly Sun is not a community paper. Of course it does carry the odd news or two. But it thrived (throve also can) on stuff like Nades’ and Terrence’ expose’ and JAS’s opinions and perspectives. Since the return of Nades after the GE, however, he has been trying very hard to remind the PKR, PAS and DAP trio that he will constantly be on their backs. What is his agenda? Nades backed Lee Wah Beng with supporting reasons. But that did not fly with voters. Why? Wrong measures?
2. I wonder sometimes why it is that their opinion writers get currency just because its in print. They are not as blatant as the other print media of course. Rather appeasing sometimes even. But that is what is even more worrying. Their agenda creeps into us without us realising it.
3. WHAT ARE VT’s AGENDA? 3 Weeks before the GE he takes over from Tong, a known Anwar favourite of yesteryears. Malaysiavotes. Is that VT or Tong? Nexnews Berhad is to change to Berjaya Media Berhad. What next? Radio or TV? Why in such a crowded place?
4. Its hard now with the boycott on to see what other crap they write in their opinions. Thank God I don’t usually vent too much time in other people’s opinion. AS it is I got too much of it myself.
Mat Kampung
March 27, 2008
I sekali-sekala visit here but this is the first time I’m commenting as I don’t see you guys have got your act together.
My friend j is spot on: You boycott a paper because of its lopsided editorial policies. The MSM boycotters achieved showing & convincing that? You all decide for yourselves.
But if you call for boycott, then Boikot-lah, menyeluruh. Apa ni? Kejap nak, kejap tak nak.
If I boycott NST, it’s not b’cos I geram baca Si Zainul (that too) but b’cos of the quality of the paper.
Anyway I think The Sun is crap but nmore because of their lousy layout selalu buat I pening.
Mat Kampung
March 27, 2008
I didn’t express myself properly.
I think what I was trying to say is that just b’cos I don’t like Zainul’s column, doesn’t mean it’s one good reason enough for me to kecam NST. It has to be b’cos of its editorial or as you all keep insisting: Lies.
So to the those quarreling here, if you like Nades, it doesn’t mean it’s not the good reason you should NOT boycott The Sun since you all so heboh and kecoh over this Boikot already, okay?
Gasak! Gerakan Anti Salah Maklumat!!
apanama
March 27, 2008
come on…this newspaper is OWNED 100% by vincent, a partner to lingamgate and BN crony. just boycott altogether. dont forget all his companies TOTO, STARBUCKS, BORDERS, COSWAY, KENNY ROGERS, BUKIT KIARA AND DONT BUY HIS PROJECTS BERJAYA WHATEVERS.
Helen Ang
March 27, 2008
CLARIFYING THE HARTAL MSM STAND
Mat Kampung,
You say theSun is crap. You also cry Gasak, or calling support for a parallel movement to ours which is anti-misinformation in newspapers. Going by the views expressed, I shall take the liberty of rewording your suggestion in a more straightforward manner (by dispensing with your confusing use of triple negatives).
What you’ve observed is that some people are fans of Nades (and Terrence and Jacqueline, the three journos heavily promoted and advertised by that paper). However, just because the trio has a fan base, that’s not good enough reason for a Boycott like ours to exempt theSun from our course of action.
Or in other words, just as one bad egg (in your book, Zainul) does not necessarily make the entire NST basket unacceptable, then similarly three ‘good’ eggs do not make the whole Sun basket acceptable.
Correct? Thank you for sharing your insight with some of our regular participants who seem to have lost sight of the primary objective; this People’s Parliament project is ‘Boycott the lying NEWSPAPERS!’ theSun is a newspaper.
I’ve tried to show up its shoddy standards by cross-checking theSun’s claims against what facts I know and can verify as well as examining the level of thought informing the paper’s voice, because editorials are purpose-crafted to shape public opinion. For those of you who have access to Malaysiakini http://www.malaysiakini.com/columns/80459, I have today reviewed yet another Sun editorial (of March 26) and found it wanting.
March 24-30 is Boycott Week. We are boycotting theSun. The Hartal MSM committee are in agreement on this, our stand clearly and concisely recorded in our Media Statement of Jan 28 when we announced Paper-Free Tuesday to the public.
Our statement which we unanimously endorsed said: “Which newspapers make up MSM? In the context of The People’s Parliament initiative to tackle the matter of dishonest news reporting, we have to say that, regrettably and without exception, but to varying degrees, this would include ALL of the local newspapers.”
We had held a Press Conference on the same day. Haris fielded questions from the floor. He was asked whether there was any exceptions to the boycott as some of the Chinese newspapers have proven themselves more forthright. Haris spoke for all the committee sitting at table facing reporters when he reiterated that, regrettably, the boycott applies to all the newspapers for the many reasons we had given.
My opinion is that theSun is not worth reading, and as an activist advocating the Boycott action, I’m naturally insistent in my views. People’s Parliament cannot claim to be an advocacy and decline to advocate.
In this post, I’ve dissected ‘theSun says’ – its editorials in March which represent the paper’s voice. I did not mentioned any names, because in truth I do not know who writes them; by tradition such crème de la crème authors are never credited.
However, please be aware that when the paper ‘says’, it proffers that particular media organisation’s stand, for instance a conservative American tabloid ‘saying’ the United States should go to war with Iraq, or a liberal broadsheet banking on Barack Obama to be flagbearer for the Democrats.
On this ‘Sun-stroke’ thread, Shar101 replied personally to johnleemk. As a member of the Hartal MSM committee, Shar is within his rights to enlighten members of the public on certain insider information that we’ve been privy to. It’s his judgment call which has my backing and the blog administrator’s approval.
Commentator Paul Warren provides an incisive appraisal, saying theSun “throve on stuff like Nades’ and Terrence’ expose’ and JAS’s opinions and perspectives”. Warren’s observation is correct as the paper has actually advertised these three individuals prominently in its daily ads.
Should opinions (also called op-eds) be used as a gauge of the newspaper’s performance? We have to go on a case-by-case basis. In The Star, Wong Chun Wai, V.K. Chin and Joceline Tan’s columns can be a yardstick because they are the high-ranking editors whose output is inextricably linked to the paper’s political outlook – in the public perception.
However a fortnightly columnist contributing on say, Manga or Cat Care who is not Star staff will not cross Hartal MSM’s line of sight.
Should the three editors who were mentioned by johnleemk be open to scrutiny in terms of our reaching a conclusion as to how strongly we want to urge Boycott on theSun? Yes, because it is theSun itself which has offered up these individuals as their high-performing beacons of journalism and touted them as better than their counterparts in MSM.
On March 24 as the above post was dated, I had characterized theSun style of writing to be like ‘crowd-pleasing’ singing telegrams: [I hear sunny jingles to the tune of “ebony, ivory, living together in perfect harmony” but I’ve always failed to see substance in its social commentary columns].
I stand by my observation bracketed and will add this citation – “It is very important for everyone to realise that living in harmony is a big deal” culled from yesterday’s (March 26) editorial – to augment what I’ve collated of theSun’s mawkishness. As you can see for yourselves, I was truly prescient about theSun’s predictability, ‘living in harmony’ and such talk.
theSun’s woolly pandering to socially-correct sentiments is a demerit in my eyes, maybe not in yours. I want my paper smart and gritty. However, Johnleemk is perfectly entitled to the positive views he cherishes of theSun, as are Shar and Warren to their negative ones. All are certainly free to agree to disagree; and you are free to join us in our boycott or not. I’m hoping that you do.
Nonetheless for the record, the stand of Hartal MSM is that this Boycott Week rejects all newspapers. Haris dedicated the week to WCW & Co., I to theSun and Shar has volunteered to lend his oversight on NST — get cracking, huh, buddy!
I hope I’ve clarified on the mechanics of our Boycott for SV Singam, whose self-contradicting comments reveal him to be unclear on the concept.
SV Singam
March 27, 2008
Hey, did you guys read the Anwar interview already? I thought Nades/Terence did a pretty good job. Has the madness at the Sun ended or is this simply another phase?
BTW there’s also an interview with Gwo-Burne in the Malaysian Insider. Quite good, actually.
johnleemk
March 28, 2008
I find this whole “you are with us or against us” dichotomy to be quite confusing. All newspapers in Malaysia are little more than propaganda outlets because of our draconian media laws; that doesn’t mean their news is not worth reading, or that they won’t occasionally put out something good. I don’t have a particularly strong stance on the boycott either way – I just think it’s unfair to present the Sun’s editorials as all there are to a paper. Yes, they’re stupid and not worth reading (hardly any Malaysian editorials are, in my view), and yes, they represent the stand of the editorial board.
But Helen’s original piece went beyond slamming the Sun or its editors by quite explicitly mocking its journalists and calling its social commentary columns not worth reading. She’s completely within her rights to do this, but I felt I should at least present the other side of the coin. The Sun has published op-eds that I don’t think any other English daily in the country would carry – Azmi Sharom’s classic on Article 153 of the Constitution sticks in my head till today, over one and a half years later.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t be scrutinising these people; by all means, let’s do that (who watches the watchmen, after all?). But I am saying I felt Helen too easily glossed over the nuances of the situation in her original article, and I presented my own view in response. As she says, we are both within our rights to do this.
I recognise that Helen’s response was not directed only at me but at others like SV Singam. To each his own. Nevertheless, I would hope we will try to appreciate the nuances a situation presents, rather than glossing them over for the sake of constructing an unnecessarily dichotomous worldview. We can oppose something while still recognising the good it does; I have praised various BN leaders on various occasions, but never would I dream of voting for them. The same goes for the Sun; I have never thought it a particularly great newspaper in absolute terms, but relative to other papers, it has generally been a breath of fresh air. I thought it strange that one would be so quick to apparently dismiss it as completely worthless without even acknowledging the contributions that the Sun, or at least some of its journalists and columnists, have made.
Paul Warren
March 28, 2008
Hey, is it a first for Tun Mahathir to have a letter from him published in a Newspaper? The Sun carried it on its front page.
Mat Kampung
March 28, 2008
Helen sista, about my “triple negatives”. Okaylah, since you dok hurai dengan panjang lebar, quoting ME! saying The Sun is crap … but what you say boleh diterima pakai.
What you say I say is (I’m saying it simpler now) Nades so what, not reason don’t want to boycott The Sun. Corrack, corrack!
Bruder John, why you so confused? I’m giving my dua kupang here b’cos we all share the same objektif. If you want to talk about lopsided, then RTM, TV3, Bernama, BM papers more in the same boat. So we must all work together, have a Barisan Rakyat Banteras Pembohongan.
I malas nak rujuk your big words in dictionary but I earlier agreed sepenuhnya with what you said about judging a paper by its lopsided editorial policies. You admit about some parts in The Sun, “theyre stupid and not worth reading” and you call them “inane ramblings of the editorial desk” (like you also ‘infernal ramblings’, what). Dah sekian banyak alasan mu sendiri bagi masih tak cukup syarat ke?
Maybe the Hartal people perasan ‘cos they keep reminding us again and again that The Sun did not publish their letter to the editor. So they’re calling for a week boycott, for me — BOLEH, can sokong. In fact, I’ve been boycotting much longer and encouraging my sepupu x2 to leave off BH but harder to get them off Metro, what to do.
I’m going to cut & paste my bro (kan ni yang you kata): “Boycott the newspaper for its loopsided editorial policies if you will” — you got spelling mistake but ‘loopy’ also describes them papers, so Jom Boikot!
Mat is now leaving the building! Adios.
SV Singam
March 28, 2008
Helen wrote I hope I’ve clarified on the mechanics of our Boycott for SV Singam, whose self-contradicting comments reveal him to be unclear on the concept.
OK, so you caught what you saw to be contradictions in my stance WRT voting for Guo-Burne as opposed to my position on party hopping. To me they appear to be different situations, but never mind.
Now you say I am self-contradicting in this matter of hartal. I was not even aware that there was a contradiction in what I had to say on this matter.
I am impressed. Do you really recall the details of what people write and perform online processing to identify variations in nuance?
Or are you being especially kind to me? If so, I humbly thank you.
Now I have to go and search through all the threads on the hartal to see if I can detect those pesky self-contradictions. sigh
johnleemk
March 28, 2008
Mat Kampung:
I’ve said on several occasions that I think BN has some great, principled members and leaders. Does this mean I support BN? I leave it to you to complete the analogy.
Helen Ang
March 29, 2008
johnleemk,
You said this: “(1) All newspapers in Malaysia are little more than propaganda outlets; (2) that doesn’t mean their news is not worth reading, (3) or that they won’t occasionally put out something good.
(1) is the reason that Hartal MSM is calling for boycott, on a matter of principle.
I shall engage you on (2) & (3) and am inviting you to have the first say because I trust that you will acquit yourself honourably in taking up my challenge.
You cited “Azmi Sharom’s classic on Article 153 [Malay special position] of the Constitution sticks in my head till today, over one and a half years later” as representing ‘something good’ theSun published.
I believe this is the one you’re referring to, dated 27 Nov 2006. It’s headlined ‘Fear-mongers drown out genuine issues’ and talked about how ‘there is no such thing as a racial “right” to be given special treatment’.
Law professor Azmi is however a Star columnist. Nonetheless, his opinion on that particular Umno General Assembly was published by theSun as a letter. In this regard, you’ll have to admit that it was a one-off. I could not find another other piece of writing credited to Azmi in theSun, using the Search option on its website.
As you and I remember, the past three Umno assemblies have been characterised by the keris-rattling and other excesses which prompted Azmi to write what he did.
A ‘proper’ op-ed (as opposed to Azmi’s Letter to the Editor), was penned by a senior Sun staff on the same event the following year. It was headlined ‘Disquiet over piquant polemics’ http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=19689
The theme of ‘Sun-stroke’ is that certain writing represents the voice of the paper. Rustam Sani’s view on ‘institutional bias’ are pertinent to this topic and can be read here, http://suara-rustam.blogspot.com/2007/09/i-am-not-objective-blogger-and-not.html
Get back to me with your review on the letter vs theSun op-ed (weightage vis-à-vis the political situations at the time, etc) and we’ll continue the discussion. Fair dinkum?
johnleemk
March 29, 2008
Your contention is apparently that the only (or primary and most imperative) criterion for judging a newspaper is its editorials. While this is a matter of personal opinion, I don’t think this is quite the case. I cited Azmi’s letter/column as an example; it is not too difficult to think of many more. There was that classic column satirising the practice of letting converts dissolve their marriages in Syariah courts (I forgot who penned it, but it was hilarious and well to the point).
If you look hard enough most newspapers have their strong points – for a brief period I actually looked forward to reading the NST because every Thursday it carried a satirical column by Amir Muhammad (which I believe was spiked after not too long). But I have always thought the Sun stood out as a little better than the rest (at least prior to its being bought out, at which point its shaky editorial leanings took a drastic turn for the worse) because it was the only one consistently printing material actually worth reading.
As I’ve said, if you want to insist that the only fair criterion to judge a newspaper by is its editorials, fine. But if such is the case, when convincing others to join your boycott, it is incumbent upon you to either prove that this is the only worthy measure of a paper, or that others’ perceptions of the newspaper’s strengths are either totally unfounded, or correct but ultimately outweighed by the wrongs committed by the paper.
Stepping through these cases, I don’t think you have proven that editorials are the only meaningful method of judging a paper. Yes, the Sun has skewed editors who can’t write well. Guess what – most newspapers around the world have biased editors (it’s kind of the whole point of having editorials – so editors can express an opinion). Perhaps their writing is horrid, and their opinions worthless, but does this make the Sun worth boycotting? Only if it makes this the case for most newspapers.
I don’t think you really have a way of arguing that the Sun has not printed some thoughtful columns and op-eds, because it has. They are not isolated cases. So we are left with a cost-benefit analysis – does the benefit of reading these columns outweigh the bad done by supporting the management of the Sun? In my view, not really – but my gripe with the original article you penned is precisely that you hardly paid this any attention. You lambasted the journalism of the Sun in a throwaway sentence while focusing on its editorials. While they’re definitely biased, especially as of late, I don’t think you made the case for a boycott – at least not a case that examined carefully the costs and benefits of reading the Sun, and doing justice to the nuances of the situation.
Helen Ang
March 29, 2008
Dear John,
Did you read theSun link on ‘Disquiet over piquant polemics’ I gave earlier? That’s not an editorial! It’s an op-ed in a column … I’m prepared to move on as we’re both it seems, quite in agreement that theSun editorials – to quote your words – are “inane rumblings”.
(1) So what we’re looking at next is something taken from theSun’s social commentary columns (which it has a lot of, including their many different guest writers).
Do have a read of ‘Piquant polemics’ first; it’s on the same topic as Azmi’s, i.e. how the non-Muslims have reacted to the Umno general assembly, and can be considered as something representative of the paper’s institutional outlook. Meaning, it is comparatively like how WCW, VK or JT’s columns would be representative of The Star (note: columns, not anonymous editorials like ‘theSun says’ or ‘Star says’).
(2) John, you say to me “if you want to insist that the only fair criterion to judge a newspaper by is its editorials, fine.” No, I do not insist that it’s ‘the only’ criterion but I’m sticking to my guns that it is one of the main criteria because it’s an indicator of any newspaper’s general editorial bias. In other words, the voice of the paper sets the tone and the rest follow the tune.
I deliberately chose editorials (aside from their pole position as the ‘voice’ of the paper) to deconstruct because in this way, my review of them does not become personalised. Like I said earlier, I haven’t the faintest clue who writes them – I’m unacquainted with any of the leader writers in theSun, and as far as I know, the common practice is for such writers to work on roster/rotation or logically speaking, according to their strengths on the topics.
If I had wanted to, I could have picked any one of the lightweight social columns that theSun carried this week and ‘mocked’ them to persuade People’s Parliament participants to come around to my view that these too are “inane rumblings”, albeit not replicating an editorial’s blatantly pro-government texture.
But at the moment, it’s a “heads you win, tails I lose” situation for me because if I were to whack columns (i.e. articles with bylines), then certain high-horsed people would preach “there is nothing to be gained by taking pot shots at individuals”.
(3) John: “But I have always thought the Sun stood out as a little better than the rest (at least prior to its being bought out, at which point its shaky editorial leanings took a drastic turn for the worse) because it was the only one consistently printing material actually worth reading.”
Helen’s rejoinder, also in reply to Mat Kampung:
No, Hartal MSM committee is not ‘perasan kot’ (miffed) that our Letter to theSun Editor was not published. The reason we wrote that letter was to bring to light our misgivings, which on hindsight, we can see coincides with John’s present assessment as well as that of others who’ve commented in People’s Parliament.
John said after Berjaya-Vincent Tan “bought out” or totally took over theSun, “its shaky editorial leanings took a drastic turn for the worse” while the editorials remain “definitely biased, especially as of late”. Exactly!
In our Hartal MSM letter, we noted the departure of theSun group editor-in-chief Ho Kay Tat and his deputy Dorothy Teoh, and questioned its implication to the slant of the paper’s future coverage, especially as the change to the top editorial and management line-up occurred just prior to the general election. Please read link below, and btw John, the writer you enjoy – Amir Muhammad – is also embedded (see url within) in this story. http://harismibrahim.wordpress.com/2008/02/15/letter-to-thesun-from-the-hartalmsm-committee/
(4) I absolutely get where you’re coming from and appreciate all the comments that you’ve contributed to this thread. I grant that the views and concerns you’ve brought up are legitimate. If I did not think so, I would not have ceded the floor to you – for you to have your say.
In fact, I do respect your opinion as such that I’d like your permission to submit portions of your blog posting of March 12 for inclusion in a book being written about GE12 for a reputable international publisher (this is a genuine request).
My own opinion is similar to Paul Warren who wrote: “I wonder sometimes why it is that their [theSun] opinion writers get currency just because it’s in print. They are not as blatant as the other print media of course. Rather appeasing sometimes even. But that is what is even more worrying. Their agenda creeps into us without us realising it.”
Therefore overall, I’m questioning theSun’s ‘institutional bias’. I do hope that you share my respect for Rustam Sani and will read him on this, http://suara-rustam.blogspot.com/2007/09/i-am-not-objective-blogger-and-not.html
Linking Paul and Rustam’s arguments, I’m suggesting you evaluate whether the columns (we’re off editorials now) were shaping a certain agenda – i.e. the national narrative – for directing or appeasing agitated public opinion. The floor is yours, John. I trust you to do justice to the nuances of the situation.
Helen Ang
April 18, 2008
CROSS-REFERENCE:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The verbatim comment below was posted on April 5 at http://harismibrahim.wordpress.com/2008/02/19/do-malaysian-newspapers-not-publish-clarification/
These are the recent developments at theSun. On April 1 (online copy ‘updated’ April 4, this is an editorial flaw in theSun, i.e. not dating its cached e-articles strictly as per print publication date), the paper’s R. Nadeswaran wrote a ‘comment’ which was filed in their website under ‘Letters’.
In his comment, Nades made the claim: “This newspaper has prided itself as one of the few that practise the policy of ‘right of reply’ … [though] Sometimes, letters and replies are not published in full because of space constraints.”
Well, the Hartal MSM letter alluded to [in the 'Clarification' post linked above] was less than 400 words – which would not have strained theSun’s column inches overmuch – was not published at all. http://harismibrahim.wordpress.com/2008/02/15/letter-to-thesun-from-the-hartalmsm-committee/
Nades was responding to Chandra Muzaffar who had availed himself of the ‘right of reply’ to assert that “journalist Terence Fernandez makes a defamatory remark about me [Chandra] which has to be set right in the interest of accurate, honest journalism.”
Anwar Ibrahim had earlier threatened a multi-million ringgit defamation suit against Chandra for the latter’s comments relating to his expositon that it would be “an unmitigated disaster” for Malaysia if the PKR de facto leader were to become prime minister, and etc.
What’s more interesting is that the MSM on March 4 went to town with Chandra’s stinging remarks against Anwar the day before, this being the final lap to polling day March 8.
The general consensus of media observers and the disgusted general public is that MSM denied Anwar his balanced access to rebut Chandra, and this strategy backfiring on the BN. Anwar had had to avail himself of the ‘right of reply’ in Singapore, speaking to the island republic’s press corps.
In fact, on March 5, theSun together with other Malaysian MSM gave prominence to Chandra’s declaration that he would stand by his denunciation of Anwar, the lawsuit notwithstanding.
Given such, a March 27 interview with the hitherto ‘irrelevant’ and ‘invisible’ Anwar in theSun came as a surprise and perhaps hints that after BN’s general election losses, the media landscape has shifted ground, like lalang.
ADDITIONAL NOTE:
MSM couldn’t sing enough of Anwar’s praises when he was Deputy PM but turned on him in the blink of an eye when he was sacked by Mahathir.
If MSM practicised fair journalism, a politician’s exposure in newspapers would not be solely dependent on whether he was in favour with the current establishment or not.
The same situation with MSM giving Mahathir a hero’s send off as God’s gift to Malaysia when he retired and later blacking him out.
Lalang.