Saturday, January 10, 2009

Party Political Films UNBANNED!!!!!!!!!!!

I guess that our govt has figured out that it is not quite consistent to say that people are suppose to understand 100 page financial prospectus and smart enough to avoid being missold structured products by banks when they are easily influenced by poisonous party political films put out by evil opposition members. They figured that with the internet, and people travelling widely to other countries, their brains are already poisoned beyond our govt's ability to wash clean with such bans.
"Singapore will soon allow party political films hat are objective and not distort facts, and an independent citizel panel will be set up to pass them...." - Straits Times
"Yes, these films have to be as objective and truthful as the Straits Times "
- Lucky Tan

If you read the article carefully it seems to say that if Chua Mui Hoong decides to become a political film director and objectively create a few films applying the same standards as her articles in the Straits Times these films will be approved and shown. ...however it is not so clear if Martin See makes another film it will be allowed to be shown. In place of the ban, we now have a panel to decide what Singaporeans should be allowed to see. Facts are not to be distorted and for a panel chosen from the establishment what is seen as facts, truth and what is distortion will simply mean that Martin See's film Singapore Rebel will remain banned .....and if Chua Mui Hoong' makes a new documentary "Great Thoughts and Infinite Wisdom of MM Lee", it will have no problem getting approval.

I personally think this is great. With so much poisonous material in the internet, now that the ban on party political films is lifted, the PAP govt can now make sure the right type of films can be broadcasted by Media Corp and shown to Singaporeans. ...and panel is in place to ensure that the film has no distortion of the truth....and the truth will be what this panel decides it should be.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

"Yes, these films have to be as objective and truthful as the Straits Times "
- Lucky Tan

----------------------------

Which Straits Times? The one that gets a ranking of 144th for Press Freedom 2008? lol

http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=29031

Anonymous said...

aiya, they always use a panel, a committee, a presidential or ministerial committee or what-the-fuck-big-name advisory committee as Smoke-Screen. Sounds grand, look good, but hollow.
They already decide that you are to receive PAP brainwashing influence, you think they will change otherwise?

You think otherwise, they are going to label you as RADICAL, SUBVERSIVE.

ST said...

Internet bad.

Straits Times good.

so Mr Tan, can you please close down your blog site?

Anonymous said...

nobdy is going to subvert them. they're so best, we are happy and honored to watch the ending with glee. :)

Il Mango said...

The Straits Jacket is probably the worst paper in the world. I don't know of any expat that read that trash. However my dog strongly disagree with me. He says he finds it of very good quality, strong, and comfortable and has been using it for his daily crap for the past few years.
It is not so much the propaganda, we all know it's there, but the arrogance of it all. Do they seriously believe in what they write? Do Singaporeans really believe that bullshit?
Hell, the New Light of Myanamr or the Saigon Times have less propaganda than that....
Great blog Lucky Tan. Interesting articles you post. Unfortunately I cannot comment too much or the governement will cancel my visa....;-)

Alfred said...

bull-FRACKING-SHIT!
The Lee Family is always right..the rest of the world wrong.

Anonymous said...

they re right they re best they re the smartest so we kick back and watch lor. hahaaaa.

Alfred said...

Not the time to flaunt your riches
Insight Down South
By SEAH CHIANG NEE

A high-ranking civil servant’s account about spending RM110,124 for him, his wife and son to learn fine French cooking has blown up in his face.

A GOVERNMENT elite has stirred ripples by talking of his expensive cooking lessons in France, revealing how hard times are deepening class differences in Singapore.

Inadvertently creating controversy was the permanent secretary at the Environment and Water Resources Ministry, one of the highest ranking civil servants.

Tan Yong Soon had related how he had spent S$46,000 (RM110,124) for himself, his wife and son for a five-day trip to learn fine French cooking.

In ordinary times, this leisurely – but rather insensitive – account would not have amounted to anything much but these days are, of course, far from normal.

Two factors invited criticism to flare.

First, he was seen as flaunting wealth, obtained from his high pay, at a time when Singapore is suffering one of its worst slumps in history.

Many thousands of workers are still losing jobs or suffering wage cuts.

And, secondly, government leaders are accused of being hugely overpaid, as a result of which some are no longer able to relate to the common people.

Tan was also accused of “boasting” about his elitist background when he wrote that his wife was “a senior investment counsellor at a bank” and his son, a soon-to-be student at America’s prestigious Brown University.

“Taking five weeks’ leave from work is not as difficult as one thinks,” Tan said.

“Most times, when you are at the top, you think you are indispensable. But if you are a good leader who has built up a good team, it is possible to go away for five weeks or even longer.”

Singaporeans were largely unimpressed. Some were angry. His fling at France’s prestigious Le Cordon Bleu in the face of rising poverty is the latest example of how out of tune some of Singapore’s well-paid elites are with heartland realities.

About 20% of affluent Singapore’s population lives in poverty with welfare payout to the poorest of the lot limited to a mere S$290 (RM694) a month.

When a government backbencher wanted to have it increased, a Cabinet minister refused, demanding: “How much do you want?”

Many Singaporeans were already unhappy with the multi-million dollar salaries paid to Cabinet ministers and top civil servants even in happier times.

(Despite a recent cut of up to 19%, the government here remains, by far, the highest paid in the world.)

The pay issue remains very controversial and contributes to the class division in society, a them-verses-us mentality that has apparently sharpened as a result of the economic crisis.

The whole episode has shown how the class – and social – divide is widening in high-tech Singapore.

The controversy over Tan’s trip has political implications for a government that is pondering over whether or not to call for a snap general election, which is not due until 2010-11.

In other developed countries from Britain to Japan, it would not have any impact since it involves a civil servant, not a political leader.

But the system is very different in Singapore, where the line separating the two hardly exists.

The Chinese characters “zeng fu” are used to describe the political leadership as well as the civil service.

Some questioned why Tan’s choice of spending his own wealth should be the public’s business – but not many are buying into it.

Established blogger Redbean articulated: “Tan is no ordinary, rich Singaporean. He is a senior civil servant ... and part of the governing elite.

“(He) should be seen as one who would be able to empathise with ordinary Singaporeans who are going through tough times ... (when) the Prime Minister is preparing the people for some belt-tightening and ‘bitter medicine’.”

Besides, if Tan had wished he should have spent his money at home to help the troubled economy rather than abroad, some believed.

Tan’s is by no means the only example of elitist snobbery, nor the worse.

A bigger controversy flared up four years ago when Wee Shu Min, the teenage daughter of a Member of Parliament, came across the blog of a Singaporean who wrote that he was worried about losing his job.

She called Derek Wee “one of many wretched, under-motivated, over-assuming leeches in our country.

“If you’re not good enough, life will kick you in the b***s ... Our society is, I quote, ‘far too survival of fittest’,” said Shu Min, who hailed from the elite Raffles Junior College.

“... Unless you are an arm-twisting commie bully, which, given your whiny, middle-class, under-educated penchant, I doubt,” she added before signing off with “please, get out of my elite uncaring face”.

The girl was flamed by hundreds of Singaporeans, but when her father Wee Siew Kim – an MP in Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s constituency – told a newspaper that “her basic point is reasonable”, the row moved well beyond blogosphere.

A news agency, in reporting this, said: “The episode highlighted a deep rift in Singapore society and was an embarrassment for the ruling People’s Action Party and PM Lee.”

Raffles JC, which has produced several state leaders, had another brush with student snobbishness.

When a student found that a Raffles girl was dating a boy from a lower-achieving neighbourhood school, he hit out at him and had a message for lower-ranking students everywhere.

“Quit trying to climb the social ladder by dating students from top schools.”

There are signs the class distinction is getting into some young minds.

A reporter recounted how her friend was shaken when her young daughter came home one day and mentioned in passing that poor people were “stupid, obviously”.

Anonymous said...

How come there's no story about the civil servant who could afford to take 5 consecutive weeks of leave to attend French cooking courses in Paris?

From what I understand, even my friends who are teachers do not enjoy 5 consecutive weeks of paid leave during the June or Dec vacation period.

Is life so easy at the top of the civil service? A ridiculously high salary, 5 weeks of holidays not counting public holidays...

Anonymous said...

see, so nice to us! set up another committee to help protect and educate us.

hmmm... actually this is one-stone-three-birds.

one: to be seen as "removing" the ban.

two: to promote politically correct films.

three: to reward monetarily "independent" citizens chosen to make up the committee.

Anonymous said...

Yes, its always the same approach, create an "independent" body, and one stone three birds solution, as the previous post said.

Dont we have an independent press, independent judiciary, independent elections commission, .....

Anonymous said...

Here are a few more examples of independent committees.

- to investigate how Mas Selamat' had escaped. Blame was only assigned to the lowest officer.

- to push through the hugely unpopular CPF Life (compulsory annuity) down the people's throats

- to let public transport companies keep raising fare rates

- to relieve MAS from being involved with the Lehmen Bros minibond crisis

Forming independent committees is becoming an overused tactic.