Saturday, June 20, 2009

Woman accused of agreeing to be 'fall guy'


Leung Man Kwan, who is out on bail, could be jailed for up to seven years and fined if she is convicted.
...
This is a short article that took up a quarter page of the Straits Times, home section. It is a case of a woman who allegedly accepted $1000 in payment for taking the fall for someone else over a traffic infringement of running a red light.
...
Initially, it stepped on my curiousity to continue reading what are the add ons to her actions, that might lead her in jail for up to seven years if found convicted. However, as I screen through the details of the news, there was not much that is further elaborated. It left me wondering if she really deserve such a heavy sentence for perverting this course of justice.
...
We all know that the news was published to firstly, provide receivers with news and information that we need to get through a day. Secondly, it served as a cultural transmission to educate the masses. I believe that is why the news was somehow being exaggerated here, since such 'transactions' are certainly not rare among the citizens, and most probably happens frequently daily. However, it was not quite possible to trace them down and therefore these cases are taken lightly by the offenders. I see this as a tactic of the government using the media to reinforce and posing a 'scare' to the public.
...
Next, the media's agenda setting function had selected to report little on the case and putting a huge focus on the punishment thats Leung Man Kwan might receive, this clearly shows that the media gatekeepers had chose the issues to which the government wanted to gain wide attention on.
...
I believe some issues here are also made invisible, because the media would reflect and reproduce only those ideas and values that uphold their interests and purpose. I found the lack of information of how the police managed to identify the case, and why would she be convicted to such huge sentence. The punishment for the real convict who run the red light, and the mastermind police officer who came up with the suggestion and roped the transaction, was not mentioned at all.
...
Although the newspaper is one of the most reliable sources here in Singapore, this had certainly left me putting big doubts on their media reports. Some commented that because the police officer's sister is one of the highest ranking woman police officer in the force and therefore he can get away with it. I have heard many cases like these, when people approach relatives and friends who works in the government sector for help and often succeed.
...
However, even if these cases identified and caught, I am sure they will not be reported and published as this will impose a bad image for Singapore's government and police force sector.
...
So, do you agree with me, in relation to the above article, that the media had played powerful effects in controlling and choosing the 'beneficial' information to be published? (:

10 comments:

  1. somewhat i agree with you that "the media had played powerful effects in controlling and choosing the 'beneficial' information to be published?" But everything might not be true. Its a fact that media sources like newspaper,radio or ever banners playes a part in projecting what people want to know but its mainly more on what people want to see. And bout "Some commented that because the police officer's sister is one of the highest ranking woman police officer in the force and therefore he can get away with it. I have heard many cases like these, when people approach relatives and friends who works in the government sector for help and often succeed" how true can that be? It can never be successful, it can be just a stroke of luck that it manage to cover up anyway what are the chances? Its never easy to cover up things in singapore. Singapore is a country with law and orders. Covering up someone mistake might lead to own sucide. Overall i feel that this article sets to others as a warning and think carefully bout your action and the consequences.

    ReplyDelete
  2. hi anonymous,
    thanks for your comment.
    but i don't see whats the difference between what ppl want to know and what ppl want to see? haha.
    and i said that statement of ppl approaching relatives and friends is because i have seen and heard about many successful cases like these around me. so, although not as open and many as our neighbouring countries, the possibilities are definitely still there, and this just shows that they covers it really well.
    i can only agree with you that this article is published to serve as a heavy warning, since the government could not currently do much about it....

    ReplyDelete
  3. wow.. way to go for reading the article with such a critical analysis. i would have never bothered to think that hard. but we all know the singaporean govt holds a tight grip on local media. maybe that's why the newspaper, Streats, was short lived. personally i thought it was a pathetic attempt at a tabloid. i guess tabloid can never work in govt dictatorships.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Singapore's media is ranked 154th, it's not surprising that things published are not 100% accurate. I always take the news with a pinch of salt and rather read overseas news online.

    Looking at newspapers nowadays, the articles they publish are absurd. The kind of news published, seriously makes me think that they should be ranked lower than 154.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The government and its various arms control singapore. it tells you guys what and when to think about things. For the majority of things its for the better. However good investigative report on the article.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Media has the power to control the thoughts of people or to steer it to a particular side. For example, the recent news about Kristen Stewarts pregnancy was stirred up by a Austrialian magazine and soon word was spread that she's having Robert Pattinson's child. But how much truth lies in that article? It could be fabricated just to make people think that it's true, and at the same time to create awareness of their magazine and sales figures.

    So much happens daily, but yet it is a miracle how publishers manage to shrink everything down into just a few pages of paper. It's a wonder what other news that happened in the world are being left out, just because the editors deem it as "unimportant" or "not-as-important-as-the-rest". What we see in news clip or read in the papers are not first hand news. The media decides what is important and we have no say in it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Definitely, media have got a very high impact on the public.
    Media has got such a big power to sawy the thots of public, the public cant escape the clutches of media or ignore the publicity shown or given out by the media.
    However, no matter what news izit, the media have to take the responsibility of wadeva news they published to the public.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I definitely agree. How so many times you can see facts being distorted for the sake of higher readership! Seriously, we cannot read the news and take every word for it. You need to think and analyze yourself sometimes.

    And I did hear before that Herald Tribute was banned in Singapore just because it happened to mention something negative about MM Lee. So from here, we can once again see that the news is being controlled. What is 'beneficial' to us then is being released! But what they determined 'beneficial' might not be what we deem as!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. hi phyllis,
    thanks for your comment and the useful example of the Herald Tribute. it just shows how media is highly filtered and tightly controlled in singapore. whatever that is going to reflect bad on the government or media itself is not going to be published, or at least they are reported to the minimal.
    this might also be a result of why singaporeans tend not to speak up against the government isnt it. however, we cant deny that the tight controls had resulted in the peaceful society we have in singapore.

    ReplyDelete
  10. very true with the tight control and fellow Singaporeans who do not dare to speak their mind as any wrong thing said might land them in jail or fine etc. But it is also true that with such system, we have a better and safer place to stay in. Too much freedom can be a problem sometimes. Bet there will always be pros and cons on either side. Can never have the best of both world! Maybe with the controlled information being published may have its pros too!

    ReplyDelete