You are what you print, Kay Tat
theSun printed this on Page 16 in its August 2 edition:

QUESTION TIME: With a print-run of 230,000 copies per day and an extrapolated x3 daily readership that reaches 690,000 people, did theSun intend to incite the masses to literally "put a gun to the heads of many of those in power" in order to move things among government officials under the Abdullah administration?
Ironically, the well-read Citizen Nades column, which contained words to that effect, was printed on the same day when theSun went on to publish on Page 14 a gung-ho editorial, titled: Control the hot air over media control.
Two days after, August 4, theSun/The Edge and Nexnews Group Executive Editor P. Gunasegaram lodged a complaint with the authorities against this weblog for "carrying a posting inciting people to do bodily harm to Gunasegaram over an article he wrote".
In an email to this blogger dated August 3, Gunasegaram said: "I am especially concerned about your lack of sensitivity and your absolute disregard for a situation made tense following the tear gas attack on the former prime minister."
Ho Kay Tat (seated left in picture), the Group Editor-in-Chief and managing director of Nexnews, the company majority- owned by tycoons Tong Kooi Ong (seated right in the picture) and Vincent Tan that publishes theSun and The Edge, mitigated for Gunasegaram by stating that
... as a newspaper group, Nexnews supports freedom of speech and freedom of expression but a threat to hurt someone is criminal intimidation, not freedom of expression.
"Freedom of expression does not extend to inciting people to cause harm to someone else," Ho said. "Indeed, the threat to Gunasegaram was clearly meant to shut him up. Those of us who cherish freedom of expression should be abhorred that a website that claims to be a champion of free speech saw it fit to allow someone to make that threat."
By printing what he had printed on August 2, did Ho Kay Tat -- a former KL-based bureau chief for Singapore Business Times for many years -- practise double-standards on media ethics? Isn't he aware that by printing the statement that says "put(ting) a gun to the heads of many of those in power" can be read as "a threat to hurt someone (that) is criminal intimidation", if Gunasegaram's principle and raison d'être were equitably applied?
Consistency in media ethics
Screenshots, in principle, will not file a police report, for example citing the Penal Code and the Print Presses and Publication Act, to rein in theSun, its Group Editor-in-Chief and the columnist over those printed words that are now further circulated online via its news archive, lest media freedom and the larger issue of good public government is submerged. In fact, we want Citizen Nades to continue writing the way he does best, investigative journalism with no holds barred.
But if Ho Kay Tat and Ginasegaram chose to blow their trumpets in vilifying bloggers for allegedly inciting public sentiments with a view to a kill, then, while theSun continues to commit the same alleged crime it used (and abused) to demonise the bloggers, they had better be consistent in guarding their moral high horse. You cast the first stone and you face the consequences in public opinion.
However, should the public feel offended by theSun's August 2 column, and regard it as a criminal intimidation against "the many of those in power" under the present Abdullah administration -- and want to file a police report against the paper, I will not stand in your way to pose any obstacle.
To the Ho Kay Tat in theSun, you, after all, are what you print.
That said, I urge that we should not take it lightly over a reader's email that Screenshots had received. In the name of public interest, I have published it verbatim (font enhancement is the email writer's), below, for you to ponder seriously over the issue of media ethics.
In the final analysis, if media ethics were to be made a whorehouse in this country, at least be consistent with your business hours.
Mailbag
From: Nazroof Hakim
To: jeffooi.screenshots@gmail.com
Date: Aug 5, 2006 5:19 PM
Subject: Gunasegaram is angry. Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh scary
Dear Jeff,I need to make my observation regarding the “shoot” issue.
Let me state here for the record that I am merely commenting from the perspective of an observer. Think of me as a spaceman, high up in space with my nothing but my observation.Attached is a PDF copy of an article written by Guna’s colleague at theSun, R Nadeswaran. There are two issues for our immediate attention (see the circles in red).
Firstly, Nade wrote and I quote, “And it is an open secret that unless you put a gun to the heads of many of those in power, nothing will move”.Secondly, the date the article was published is the same date ‘The Myth of Mahathir‘s Invincibility’ article was published, i.e. Wednesday August 2, 2006.
My comment:
So here, we have a well established writer, writing something about putting a gun to the heads of those in power to get the “right attention”. Now I am sure that theSun readership base is much, much higher than Screenshots (no offence Jeff).
So the question is why the likes of Khir Toyo or worst Pak Lah’s secret police do not take any action against Nade?
The answer is because they fully understand that as public figures there are certain risks to the job. There will always be people that will disagree with them. Nonetheless all those are part and parcel of leading a public life.
Guna obviously has an ulterior motive to make a hill out of a molehill. So please do not for a second think you can make a fool of everyone by hiding behind the veil of the law after you and your company has kicked the same law in the balls.
p/s to Jeff:
I hope you post this open letter for all your readers to value for themselves. Internet can be the cure for many major problems. Don't let the few but very, very powerful destroy that fact.
Feel free to edit the letter and use my name (Nazroof). I am not afraid if they cut the newspaper doorstep delivery. Save my RM0.30.
Warm regards,
Nazroof
Comments
You're in the news again, Jeff. From The Star: http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2006/8/7/nation/15068589&sec=nation
To quote:
Which fact did you not get right?
Posted by: howsy
|
August 7, 2006 07:34 AM
Double standards!!! But then this whole thing is a sandiwara by a few people to bring down bloggers who write the truth. They are using this issue to blow up the whole issue and make it a test case.The truth needs to be surpress. anyway it is good as more people will know jeffooi.com.
well jeff I have to shoot off.cao.
Posted by: rocky
|
August 7, 2006 09:39 AM
So, when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her". (John 8:7)
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye. (Matthew 7:3-5)
Nobody is perfect, Nades. Whilst I respect your thoughtful posts, learn to forgive others for their shortcomings (if at all there was a mistake on their part).
Posted by: pablopabla
|
August 7, 2006 09:42 AM
(What the HELL are you pabling about, pablopabla!)
The SUN ain't shining too bright no more, eh?
So, it's business now. "Live and let Live?"
You blokes are demoralising your own team.
Sometimes, it be better not to run down others to save your own s.
Just hope you guys won't Let the sun go down on us.
Posted by: doovad
|
August 7, 2006 10:11 AM
Offtopic :
For IT world, FUD is a popular term. It stand for Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt.
Many IT company found their FUD strategy backfire due to ever changing Internet landscape.
Generally, FUD is derive from a political/marketing strategy call Appeal to fear
Posted by: moo_t
|
August 7, 2006 10:17 AM
“And it is an open secret that unless you put a gun to the heads of many of those in power, nothing will move”.
... and if that does not work, then I suppose if you said " ... plus a stick of dynamite in their underpants to get them off their backsides " would be viewed as promoting terrorism ?
OK - more careful next time.
Posted by: Michael Lee
|
August 7, 2006 10:25 AM
Jeff,
You now have cause to file the same complain to MCMC verbatim with just a few changes. AFter all all public servants are our servants and should a gun be pointed to their heads its like its pointed to our heads as well. So I guess we too have the right to file a complain as we feel threatened. If MCMC wants to act they should do so in parallel.
Guna should go hang himself with a long shoe string now if he cannot have the decency of apologising to you both through his press as well as through a personal mail that ought to be published here. Otherwise SUN be warned, every word you publish will get the scrutiny that it deserves.
Posted by: Observer
|
August 7, 2006 10:30 AM
This Fu cannot just say "misreported" and not say what and when it was that he was misreported. Did Jeff actually report anything or did Jeff merely carry a report or quote a report from the mainstream media? The problem with these losers like Fu is that they have not really enough liguistic skills and the bigger sin is not knowing how and when they indulge in stuff they should well stay out of. Proving themselves to be bigger idiots then they really are is ofcourse a skill all its own that our Malaysian politicians have acquired.
Posted by: Observer
|
August 7, 2006 10:37 AM
doovad,
my comments above are directed at Nades and his bosses.
Sorry if the comments were confusing but the sources definately does not originate from Hell.
Posted by: pablopabla
|
August 7, 2006 10:45 AM
Wow…
Jeff,
Tq.
I will continue to be your self-appointed researcher as long as you keep on the good fight and focus on “masalah rakyat”.
Just to add…I really hope we don’t make the mistake of accepting Article 11 as another fight for “freedom of speech”. I seriously do not want to face what my grandparents had to face on May 13, 1969”.
Please follow what our PM advised - relax...have a Kit Kat.
Posted by: naz
|
August 7, 2006 11:38 AM
... take a break
Posted by: CI
|
August 7, 2006 12:59 PM
Interesting...I will take note of that..In order to fully comply with the non-violence stance of the Guna and friends, from now on, I think the word "SHOOT", "SHOT" and their various variations should be totally and completely banned by the Sun, the Edge and what not English newspapers in Malaysia.
Posted by: Niuku
|
August 7, 2006 01:35 PM
naz, you are quite right. article 11 is not about freedom of speech. it is about freedom of all malaysians to profess and practise the faith of their choosing.
Posted by: lsk
|
August 7, 2006 02:33 PM
To be fair, its inappropriate to use Nades's words (which to me is taken out of context) to argue in this case. Let's be objective about this. I personally find this amusing and yet tasteless.
Posted by: Al
|
August 7, 2006 02:44 PM
Al,
Nades's words are taken out of context to show how unfair and inapproriate Jeff being treated by the media.
Posted by: Steve
|
August 7, 2006 03:04 PM
Not only that, P Gunasegaram in his article "The myth of Mahathir's invincibility" second last paragraph also quoted "But we Malaysians have this habit of shooting ourselves in our feet oftentimes...".
Is he quoting a fact that Malaysians likes to shoot ourselves in our feet?
I for one, had not and will never do that.
Mr. Guna pls do not say we M'sians have such habit. Its bad for the country's image.
Posted by: menarinari01
|
August 7, 2006 03:07 PM
jeff:
The "shooting..." phrase is much ado about nothing... as a journalist with his English will know it's idiomatic or hyperbole usage of the language. Guna is acting on account of you -- followed by knotty Desi-- wondering when we'll hear something about the Bowman Papers case! The trouble nowadays there is too much Sandiwara going on and we must read in-between the lines, even the empty spaces...
JEFF OOI says: In the absence of a solid premise to play sniper, we will wait for the Bowman Papers to see the light of the sun. Meanwhile, let's shoot the breeze.
Posted by: desiderata
|
August 7, 2006 03:33 PM
is shoot same as ejaculate? I used to shoot lizards but did not use guns...
Much ado over nothing....
Posted by: art chan
|
August 7, 2006 04:29 PM
Dear Friends,
I don't think Guna is solely responsible for this. He does not seem like a guy will fall for this kind of cheap media tricks. I strongly believe he was tricked into this by "You know his BOSS - K.. T.." to gain popularity mileage. This poor guy willingly or unwillingly became the GOAT.
Guna, the management is cashing in on your expense and shame, bro.
Posted by: mystory
|
August 7, 2006 06:31 PM
Is this the issue of personal attack or the credibility of the journalist at stake?
Mr. Gunasegaram, please shoot me down now
Brendan Pereira on Monday: Expect attacks to continue
07 August, 2006
ANY journalist wanting to express an opinion on politics in Malaysia today is like a man trying to change a light bulb. He is trying to shed some light, but knows that he may well be on the receiving end of a painful shock. Take the case of P. Gunasegaram, the group executive editor of The Edge.
His thought-provoking article titled "The myth of Mahathir’s invincibility" unleashed a gush of bile. He was attacked mercilessly on websites and blogs, with one coward saying "somebody, please shoot this Gunasegaram for good".
Sadly, many of his critics were not interested in debating the substance of his commentary. Fewer still wanted to visit the core of his thesis — whether Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad can get back the power when someone else holds it and is not about to give it up.
Gunasegaram tracked the former prime minister’s political career, noting that on a number of occasions over the years he was challenged. But each time, the power of incumbency kept him in power.
The writer argued that based on Malaysian political history, there was a danger of overestimating the former prime minister’s power over the power of incumbency, which Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi enjoys.
Instead of tearing his argument to shreds, his critics took the easy way out — they mocked the colour of his skin, questioned his fitness to comment on a former leader, etc. By doing so, they were hoping to pummel him into submission, force him into thinking twice before attempting another piece on Dr Mahathir. Why?
Because many Malaysians are intolerant. Don’t buy all that talk about freedom of speech. We either pull up the shutters or unsheathe the knife when someone offers a differing opinion. Perhaps even more disturbing is the ease at which some people — even those who have professed to embrace all Malaysians — reach for the race card to explain their disdain for an article or writer. The trend of attacking the messenger and avoiding a debate on the message is not going to change. It is not in the interest of some parties to have clarity in the system.
It is also not in their interest to have writers and journalists dissecting their statements and actions.
So expect the personal attacks to continue. In fact, expect it to get more personal, nasty and intense. Everything will be fair game — race, religion, national allegiance. Half-truths will be stirred together with lies and served up as facts.
That is the only weapon in the arsenal of those who want to neutralise writers or journalists who are not on the same page with them.
The perfect riposte from Gunasegaram and his ilk would be to keep on writing. Heaven knows, there is so much more to tell Malaysians about the country they live in, about the leaders they support and just what is Dr Mahathir’s end game.
Posted by: ktak
|
August 7, 2006 10:32 PM
woohooo....
it's hard being famous...for the wrong reason.
(sorry jeff, pun intended)
Posted by: IImran
|
August 7, 2006 11:11 PM
Brendan: "The trend of attacking the messenger and avoiding a debate on the message is not going to change. It is not in the interest of some parties to have clarity in the system."
Go figure.
JEFF OOI says: And Satu Lagi Projeck NSTP: "Shoot to kill".
Posted by: IImran
|
August 7, 2006 11:24 PM
I am appaled by this blog's incessent attack on the "shoot" comment, and on Guna. I feel that the commentaries from Jeff and from readers should not escalate this matter beyond "burning bridges". I am asking that commentators to preserve the relationship between conflicting parties, because only then can we behave rationally and making unbiased observations.
Also, as this is a public blog-space, we readers are also the blog's stakeholders - Jeff shouldn't hijack this public blog-space for any personal feud towards anyone.
Posted by: RoadCyclist
|
August 8, 2006 09:48 AM
I agree with RoadCyclist.
Posted by: streetz
|
August 8, 2006 10:19 AM