Singapore Democrats

Home News Singapore Today's Loh replies to Chiam See Tong
Today's Loh replies to Chiam See Tong Print E-mail
Saturday, 28 February 2009
Singapore Democrats

Mr Loh Chee Kong of the Today newspaper replied to Mr Chiam See Tong's email yesterday, denying that he had agreed to Mr Chiam's request not to publish anything Mr Chiam had said about the Singapore Democrats.

Mr Chiam had emailed Mr Loh yesterday to ask Today to stop publication of the interview after the SDP raised concerns about some of Mr Chiam's characterisation of the party.

Shortly thereafter Mr Loh replied to Mr Chiam. The reporter forwarded his reply to the Singapore Democrats and asked us to publish it because this website had reported on Mr Chiam's email to Mr Loh yesterday.

In the interest of Mr Loh's right of reply, we reproduce his email in full as well as Mr Chiam's email. We will let readers read both sides of the story and let them make up their own minds.

We do not wish to sink to the level of the gutter journalism that the Singapore press practices where they regularly publish highly defamatory and untruthful articles/reports about Dr Chee Soon Juan and the SDP -- and then refuse to publish our replies or censors them heavily.


Chiam's email to Loh (27 Feb 09)

Dear Chee Kong (Today Newspaper)

On the 25 Feb, 2009 at about 11.30am during the interview, I told you not to publish anything of what I have said concerning Dr Chee Soon Juan and the Singapore Democratic Party, and later re-enforced my earlier instruction over the phone on the 26 Feb, 2009.

Despite my instructions, you went ahead to email Dr Chee for confirmation of my off the cuff comments of Dr Chee and the Singapore Democratic Party. In the event, please stop all publication of my whole interview with you on 25 Feb 2009. (emphasis original)

Sincerely,
Chiam See Tong


Loh's reply to Chiam (27 Feb 09)

Dear Mr Chiam,

Thanks for the email. May I explain myself.

Firstly, it was agreed at our interview that we would not publish any remarks which might be seen as defamatory. My email to Dr Chee asking for his comments did not touch on any of the things Mr Chiam said that might be construed as "defamatory".

Second, my email to Dr Chee was sent at 12.46pm. The conversation -- in which Mr Chiam asked to retract what he said about SDP and Dr Chee -- took place several hours later. I agreed to Mr Chiam's request and asked if we can mention the fact that he had changed his outlook on people after all these years in politics. Mr Chiam said that would be fine as these are thoughts on his personal life.

I'm sorry, we cannot accede to the request of retracting the whole interview because there is no basis for us to do that. At the same time, may I assure you that the stories tomorrow would not in any way be defamatory to anyone concerned.

regards,
Chee Kong

 

Share this article:
Facebook Technorati Stumble It! Newsvine Reddit Del.icio.us Digg This!
Comments (7)
  • Sun 01 Mar 2009 11:17 AM | g_e - As ye sow...
    [b]Chiam:[/b] [i]"On the 25 Feb, 2009 at about 11.30am [u]during the interview[/u], I told you not to publish anything of what I have said..."[/i]

    [b]Loh:[/b] [i]"it was agreed at our interview that we would not publish any remarks which might be seen as defamatory..."[/i]

    Loh seems not to be addressing Chiam point-blank. He has avoided answering directly Chiam's assertion that he was told not to publish DURING THE INTERVIEW. Instead he beats around the bush about 'defamatory remarks' and later goes on to say that [i]"The conversation -- in which Mr Chiam asked to retract what he said about SDP and Dr Chee -- took place several hours later"[/i]. That's being disingenuous about the facts i.e that Chiam told Loh not once but twice not to publish, once during and once later.

    They can't both be right. Is Loh calling calling Chiam a liar? Hopefully Chiam had the foresight to record the interview and/or have witnesses to what was actually said, otherwise it's his word against Loh's.

    It appears that [i]Today[/i]'s Senior Reporter, Mr Loh Chee Kong, was caught flat-footed by SDP's decision to publicly expose his little muck-raking adventure and is now wriggling like a shark on a hook to extricate himself from the predicament he now finds himself embroiled in with Mr. Chiam.

    All together now, "Awwww, poor Mr. Loh!"
  • Sun 01 Mar 2009 6:52 PM | | Terence Lee
    A simple case of miscommunication perhaps? I seriously doubt this was some "PAP ploy" by press to discredit SDP. Seriously.

    Chiam claims that he told the reporter not to publish any of the remarks regarding SDP, but Loh claims its only "defamatory remarks." Could both be hearing different things? Perhaps both think they are right?

    Too much fuss has been kicked up over this. Furthermore, the article is not even published yet. We should all wait for the final article to see how it goes.
  • Sun 01 Mar 2009 7:04 PM | sabrinalew - well done Mr Chiam
    Mainstream state media journalists
    have nothing better to do, over-paid
    underworked and negative.Well done Mr Chiam. Not too early. Too many dwell in the past, living in a time wrap. Let this be a lesson to all so-called dissidents. Politics is no picnic. If anything of the past needs to be repeated is the common tactic of all repressive regimes to: Cut a chicken to frighten 10 monkeys. Don't take it personally if you have been repressed in the past. If it is not you then it will be someone else. Their idea is to raise the fear levels. Insisting on thriving on the oxygen of repression is to further increase the fear levels. Do be creative about your response. Why play old broken records? Be proactive.A reactive stance is the easiest thing in the world.Tis the real bankruptcy.
  • Sun 01 Mar 2009 7:14 PM | dumbo - no miscommunication lah
    to terence lee... no miscommunication lah, just running dog loh chee kong trying to suck up to his pap masters, that all.
  • Sun 01 Mar 2009 8:02 PM | AnnA
    A scapegoat have to answer for himself. And Mr Chiam should have known already by now, after all these years that media employees of the 'other side' can never be trusted especially their head of department and the seniors.

    Anyway, they have unwittingly made SDP their mentor.

    Hehehehe...
  • Mon 02 Mar 2009 1:09 AM | ahsayman
    A lesson that should had been learnt long ago.
    You talk to the government, put a recording device on the table.
    Especially so with local journalists.
    They are not called the PAP newsletter for nothing!
    Always remember that the Media is a double edged sword.
    And in Singapore, due to the inherent lack of long term memory capacity of it's people, precedents were not noted and caution not taken.
    A timely reminder to all, this episode should be taken as!
  • Mon 02 Mar 2009 3:09 AM | Tan Tai Wei
    Terence,

    Isn't accusing SDP and Chee of indulging in "conspiratorial politics" capable of "being construed to be defamatory"?

    So, Loh could not be sincere in saying he understood Chiam to mean, during the unrecorded interview, only not to communicate "possible defamatory" remarks. For, if that were so, he would not have email that to Chee!
Please login or register to post your comments.
 
Singapore Democrats on Facebook
Banner

Act Now

Support Democracy!
Please Donate
The party that stands up for you

More options to donate
 

Ads

Magazine Support SDP , buy our 30th Anniversary Magazine here

Awesome Words

“Most of the things worth doing in the world had been declared impossible before they were done.”

Louis D. Brandeis

Other languages

Banner
Banner
Banner
 
Banner
Banner
Banner
 

Poll Results on...

 

Login



News feeds

Singapore Democrat News
Joomla! Template by Joomlashack
Joomla Templates by JoomlaShack