We note the critique of Ms Tng Hui Yi and Mr Andrew Loh of the SDP's National Day Message (watch video here) at The Online Citizen. It is apparent that much thought went into the review and the criticisms were considered ones. We welcome them.
We note that much of the critique dwelled on the substantiveness of the arguments, or the lack of it, rather than on the presentation of the message. Some of these observations are valid and will be taken on board in future presentations.
Unlike a speech delivered live to an audience, however, the attention span of viewers on an Internet video is limited. Our experience has been that a longer video filled with too many statistics and charts will attract less interest among viewers.
Detail and substance sometimes need to be sacrificed for brevity. This was a hard decision to make but after much deliberation and advice we opted for a shorter but more watchable format.
The nearly 5,000 viewers that the video has attracted to date seems to have vindicated our choice. Still, we accept that there are others who see it differently.
But what the video misses out on in detail as far as our policy positions are concerned is more than made up for in our website (for example see here, here, and here ) and our publications (SDP's Economic Report 1995; First World...For Whom 2002; Your Future, My Faith, Our Freedom, chapters 2-5; and A Nation Cheated, chapters 8-10). We encourage readers to take a closer look at these.
The reviewers also expressed a difference with our views on the issues themselves, to wit the cause of income disparity in Singapore, the foreign talent policy, and HDB scheme. We do not want to detract from the spirit of the review and will therefore take up these matters at another time.
One last point: The reason why the message was carried by four ladies is because women are woefully underrepresented in politics in Singapore. National Day messages are too important to leave only to men.
Just so that there are no doubts: The leadership of the SDP, from the Chairman on down, is one - in form and substance - with the video presentation. All of us in the party are happy to accept the brickbats as well as bouquets from one and all. In this regard, we want to thank Ms Tng and Mr Loh for their effort.
In the end, let us remember that criticism is like pain to a body. They are the last things that we look for but the body (politic) suffers if we ignore them.
Thu 20 Aug 2009 6:50 AM
|
BryanT - Criticisms are better than pain
[color=red]"In the end, let us remember that criticism is like pain to a body. They are the last things that we look for but the body (politic) suffers if we ignore them."[/color]
Coincidentally, there is an article today in the Business Times (I know I know, MSM too) entitled "Welcome complaints as useful gifts". I'll just quote two short paragraphs here :
[b][i]When customers are dissatisfied with products and services, they can choose to do either of two things: voice it out or walk away. If they simply walk away, they give organisations no opportunity to resolve their dissatisfaction.[/i]
[i]Once the negative emotions associated with complaints are put aside, they become far more useful than any compliment. Customers who complain directly to us are in fact, giving us a gift.[/i][/b]
I see a parallel between criticisms and complaints. Some of us offer criticism NOT in order to run an organisation (read SDP or PAP) down. As the article said, one can choose to just walk away.
I suppose my message is not to take criticism as a "[b]pain to a body[/b]", but more like a [b]mirror [/b]that someone is holding up for you. Smile!
PS. I still think the video was a good job.
Wed 19 Aug 2009 11:36 PM
|
Aung - World class political party
SDP’s response proves that it is quite mature and open-minded to take the criticisms. It also shows SDP’s willingness to listen and improve. If I have to name one thing world class in Singapore it will definitely be SDP; world class political party.
Thu 20 Aug 2009 2:42 AM
|
quantum
Why didn't Hsien Loong flash this out in the Powerpoint?
Good for you SDP. It's great that you can take the criticisms or feedback graciously. You have done better than PAP on many scores. It's a pity that Singaporeans are prevented from seeing this.
Thu 20 Aug 2009 6:52 AM
|
BryanT - tangeo - clarifications please
[color=red]"It's a pity that Singaporeans are prevented from seeing this."[/color]
tangeo, I agree that the ruling party sometimes does not take to criticism well. Today's parliament was a prime example - MM felt obliged to rise up to bring the "House back to earth". I felt it was an excessive response to Viswa's points made yesterday.
But I would like to seek clarification from you what you meant by Singaporeans being "prevented from seeing this".
Thu 20 Aug 2009 7:03 PM
|
tangeo
Very simple, Bryant. State media and then some. Go figure.
Fri 21 Aug 2009 12:38 AM
|
Omega Lee - Meanwhile in LaLa Land, according to Forbes,
Ho Ching has actually increased in rank as one of the MOST POWERFUL women in the WORLD, from 8th to 5th, in spite of the 10 zeros S$ flushed down a black hole.
None of the major East Asian powers, like China (excluding HK), Korea or Japan even featured in the top 100.
Fri 21 Aug 2009 12:56 AM
|
Omega Lee - old article
An old article Googled:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/27/business/worldbusiness/27iht-temasek.1.6862331.html
"
Temasek's chief, Ho Ching, likes to take risks
By Sara Webb
Published: Friday, July 27, 2007
SINGAPORE — One of the colleagues of Ho Ching once said it was her willingness to take risks, not her family ties, that won the wife of the prime minister her top job at Temasek Holdings with a mandate to shake up Singapore's state investor.
That penchant for risk-taking came to the fore this week with Temasek's unexpected £2.1 billion, or $4.34 billion, investment in Barclays, the U.K. bank that is locked in an increasingly costly bidding war for ABN AMRO in what would be the world's biggest bank takeover.
The investment is one of many big deals engineered by Ho, who keeps a low profile despite her prominence in financial circles and as a member by marriage of the first family of Singapore.
..."
Fri 21 Aug 2009 2:30 AM
|
BryanT - Omega Lee - Powerful Money Loser
[color=red]"Ho Ching has actually increased in rank as one of the MOST POWERFUL women in the WORLD, from 8th to 5th, in spite of the 10 zeros S$ flushed down a black hole."[/color]
Omega Lee, maybe that's why people thinks she is powerful - powerful in losing money, and yet there's no consequence to her.
And now she's gotten her job back to exercise more power; meaning lose more?
Fri 21 Aug 2009 3:42 AM
|
quantum
[quote]Today's parliament was a prime example - MM felt obliged to rise up to bring the "House back to earth". I felt it was an excessive response to Viswa's points made yesterday.[/quote]
Initially I felt angry, but then I went to watch the CNN video, and I am now really feeling sorry for the man and decide to drop any plans to rebut him.
Fri 21 Aug 2009 6:44 AM|
|
seebeng - That CNN video....
quantum,
If you're referring to the 14-min CNN video, then it is clearly a selective speech by Harry Lee to mislead us into believing his truncated version.
There were and still are other minorities in Singapore, but why only special privileges for the Malays, Malay as our national language, etc.
These issues have historical background and LKY is aware but deliberately avoided mentioning in parliament.
Nice to see the PAP lapdogs have no excuses with regards to their bosses' incompetence and can only wag their tails in agreement.
Dont worry lah, you have enough PRs especially from Malaysia to vote and support your regime until the end of time.
Fri 21 Aug 2009 10:58 AM
|
Robox - To seebeng
If we go back to 2000 (I think) when there was a mini fracas involving the AMP, the tudung issue, etc., there was also one session that the government held with the Muslim community that was presided over by Lee Kuan Yew.
Someone from the audience had questioned the government's non-recognition/application of exactly Article 152 of the Constitution on the special [i]status[/i] of Malays - I'm not sure that it translates into special [i]rights[/i], but I read it as more to do with the principle of amelioration in law ie. to compensate for any disadvantage faced by Malays.
Lee Kuan Yew's reply then was that "yes, it's in the Constitution but it was never defined" - a stark contrast to his 'demolishment' in Parliament (take note of that political gangster's ever present violent tendencies with his use of "demolish").
But this is the Article in question:
[b]Minorities and special position of Malays[/b]
152. —(1) It shall be the responsibility of the Government constantly to care for the interests of the racial and religious minorities in Singapore.
(2) The Government shall exercise its functions in such manner as to recognise the special position of the Malays, who are the indigenous people of Singapore, and accordingly it shall be the responsibility of the Government to protect, safeguard, support, foster and promote their political, educational, religious, economic, social and cultural interests and the Malay language.
[End]
Fri 21 Aug 2009 11:21 AM
|
Robox - SDP's Response To TOC
The reply by SDP to TOC's critique of the party's ND message is admirable no doubt; in fact the readers in TOC are cheering the [i]response[/i] to the critique by SDP more than the video itself.
SDP's response communicates a willingness to acknowledge the vulnerabilities that it encounters when doing the work that it does. This will stand the party in very good stead, and stands in sharp contrast to the image of infallibility - informed no doubt by the mental illness that is fascism - that the PAP likes projecting of itself.
However, I think that the two writers did not properly orientate themselves to the [i]format[/i] that the SDP used in the message: it wasn't a [b]speech[/b] like it was for all the other four parties.
It isn't possible to be 'substantive' when you present as short messages that will stick in peoples' minds; as long as those short messages resonate, the goal has been accomplished. Who, apart from geeks like me, remembers details like statistics after the message is delivered?
I'll bet that next year, all the parties will be gunning for something quite like the SDP's video of this year; they might away from the 'speech' format to something like the SDP video.
On a separate note, I want to compliment Mdm/Ms Prema for her contribution to the video.
I've heard from both Sri Lankan Tamils and Tamil Nadu Tamils that the Tamil spoken in Singapore is excellent; I believe they were referring to the accent-free quality, and the resulting clarity in speech of Tamil in Singapore; they're probably also talking about the Tamil used in official capacities such as in the news.
But Ms/Mdm Prema's use of the language stood out above any Tamil I've ever heard before. She truly did supreme justice to the last classical language in the world that is still in use with her crystal clear enunciation.
Congratulations, and very well done indeed, Ms/Mdm Prema.
Fri 21 Aug 2009 11:37 AM
|
ahsayman
SDP should give good consideration to removing posts that does not address the issues intended for discussion whether in articles here or videos uploaded on youtube.
There are people bent on ridiculing or disrupting the efforts by the producers.
Understandably, SDP is sensitive to being accused of censorship of opinions, a point of constant refrain in it's criticism of the PAP.
But a distinction must be made of the differences between honest counter arguments and clear ill-intentions.
Follow the lead of TOC in the management of these juvenile detractors.
Fri 21 Aug 2009 11:39 AM
|
Robox - To BryanT
Re: [color=red]"I agree that the ruling party sometimes does not take to criticism well. Today's parliament was a prime example - MM felt obliged to rise up to bring the "House back to earth". I felt it was an excessive response to Viswa's points made yesterday."[/color]
It's truly laughable that that racist Lee Kuan Yew deigns to appoint himself the custodian of good race relations in Singapore, isn't it?
It wasn't only an [i]excessive[/i] response to Viswa's speech, it was completely off target; Viswa's speech did not even remotely question the things that he chose to reply to. It was an attempt to smear Viswa, if you ask me. And mind you, I'm no big Viswa fan myself having gotten into not one altercation with him before. But I would like to think that I'm being objective and take everything on a case by case basis, unless the situation warrants otherwise.
I think that Lee Kuan Yew's rebuttal had more to do with the rest of the content of Viswa's speech, which as you correctly observed in another thread, echoed what has been discussed here - I'm sure they are all monitoring this discussion.
Viswa's speech - like what has been discussed here with MW and UI, etc. - stands in very sharp ideological contrast to the PAP ideology. Hence Lee Kuan Yew's reaction.
And it was more an emotional reaction than a rational one on Lee Kuan Yew's part.
Fri 21 Aug 2009 11:32 PM
|
BryanT - Omega Lee - Democratic approval
[color=red]"Nice to see the PAP lapdogs have no excuses..."[/color]
Omega Lee, thank you for your reply.
It seems that you have chosen to resort to name-calling to get your point through. I am sure all readers here (including myself) will democratically respect your choice.
Have a good day :)
Sat 22 Aug 2009 2:47 AM
|
BryanT - ahsayman - ridicule or criticism
[color=red]"There are people bent on ridiculing or disrupting the efforts by the producers.
Understandably, SDP is sensitive to being accused of censorship of opinions, a point of constant refrain in it's criticism of the PAP.
But a distinction must be made of the differences between honest counter arguments and clear ill-intentions."[/color]
ahsayman, it can be quite subjective what one considers to be ridicule or criticism. It usually depends on a person's viewpoint and past experiences. My view is that it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between "honest counter arguments and clear ill-intentions."
The article here above says that "criticism is like pain to a body". I chose to differ and argued that criticism should NOT be taken as a negative. In fact, it is more like a mirror that someone is holding up for you, to see yourself more clearly.
It's very much similar to the parable about the emperor's transparent clothes - one sometimes cannot see himself as naked, until someone else points out to him.
Of course, the argument should also be extended to any government in power who labels any criticism as dissent that needs to be quashed or written off.
Thu 27 Aug 2009 4:55 AM
|
g_e - TOC-ing kock
[quote]"Nice to see the PAP lapdogs have no excuses..."
Omega Lee, thank you for your reply.[/quote]
Erm... aren't you being just a leetle, ah, over-sensitive, my dear BryanT? Nowhere in his post did Omega Lee mention any names and yet you appear to have taken his remarks personally. Why is that?
Be cool. Not to worry, we all know where you're coming from, and (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) your secret is still safe with me.
[i][b]Don't look at the finger pointing at the moon or you will miss all the heavenly glory[/b][/i], as someone once intoned ominously.
Support SDP , buy our 30th Anniversary Magazine here
Coincidentally, there is an article today in the Business Times (I know I know, MSM too) entitled "Welcome complaints as useful gifts". I'll just quote two short paragraphs here :
[b][i]When customers are dissatisfied with products and services, they can choose to do either of two things: voice it out or walk away. If they simply walk away, they give organisations no opportunity to resolve their dissatisfaction.[/i]
[i]Once the negative emotions associated with complaints are put aside, they become far more useful than any compliment. Customers who complain directly to us are in fact, giving us a gift.[/i][/b]
I see a parallel between criticisms and complaints. Some of us offer criticism NOT in order to run an organisation (read SDP or PAP) down. As the article said, one can choose to just walk away.
I suppose my message is not to take criticism as a "[b]pain to a body[/b]", but more like a [b]mirror [/b]that someone is holding up for you. Smile!
PS. I still think the video was a good job.