Why? For context:

1. I think most people should know by now that I have a keen interest in issues that deal with the Singapore military and with National Service.
2. I’ve also been reading David Boey’s blog quite a bit.
3. Mr Wang’s latest post provided the impetus to write about something close to my heart.

So I was once a PIONEER writer too.

Fortunately or unfortunately, it didn’t happen during a posting while I was serving my NSF. I managed to score an internship with PIONEER under the Singapore Civil Service Internship Programme in the ‘summer’ of 2006.

According to Edgar Lee, one of the Senior Editors then, the choice was between myself and another girl. We weren’t shortlisted; we were just two kukubirds who were interested (or silly) enough to apply for that position.

Well, I thought I got it because I sounded earnest enough during the telephone interview. Actually, I got the gig because the other girl didn’t pick up her phone.

Oh, well.

The internship was one of the best things to ever happen in my life. I had just finished my second year of University, and was somewhere between being willing to write well and being able to write well.

I thought I was destined for academic mediocrity, but the stint at PIONEER was the turning point.

Being forced to write coherently – and consistently – helped me to see what I was doing wrong before, and provided me with more self-awareness when it came to improvement.

You can check out a list of the articles I wrote here. There is a distinct immaturity in each article but I improved at a very rapid pace.

To illustrate: this is the first article I wrote, this is an article from the second month of my internship, and this is the last article I wrote. See the difference?

Anyway, unlike many other people, I haven’t cancelled my PIONEER subscription.

I still read the magazine every month with a fervour: ripping open the plastic sheet that PIONEER comes wrapped in; devouring the publication from page to page.

Is it because I am a military nut? No. I follow what the SAF does  “out of a desire to ensure the system is accountable for the lives of Singaporeans who step forward to serve in uniform”.

That is my only motivation, and PIONEER provides me with one of the few links that I have to a military system that has much room for improvement.

In fact, PIONEER magazine itself provides the most apt example of the change that needs to happen.

The publication is a symbol of how the Singapore Armed Forces wants to portray itself – a glossy, polished, professional entity.

But silences speak the loudest words, and the features that are missing from PIONEER are the very same ills that plague the SAF.

For example, there are no critical commentaries from learned individuals that analyse and evaluate military policy. Neither is there a forum page for soldiers and citizens to air their views.

In spite of this, I will continue to subscribe to PIONEER.

I believe the day will come when more citizen/soldier involvement and engagement takes place. PIONEER, like Singapore and the SAF, has evolved slowly, but surely over the last few decades.

This evolution isn’t going to stop – unless something happens to derail progress, of course.

Change will happen, and I look forward to being able to thumb through an issue of PIONEER and feeling like it’s worth more than the forty cents per issue I’m paying now.

(via)

By the way, I may have been the one (or at the very least, one of the people) who provided the tip-off about the story… And believe it or not, it was through Twitter. Here’s the chronology of tweets with some background information:

Twitter / Laremy Lee: Back at NUS now for India … via kwout

I posted these, and other ‘web’ tweets using tweet.sg when I returned to NUS for the India Trip exhibition thingy.

Twitter / Laremy Lee: Also, just found out that … via kwout

I learnt about the expulsion from Zee, who was “one of the KR guys” I met. I’m not going to comment too much on the punishment, but let’s just say that I believe it’s a fallacy for every action to deserve a punitive reaction, especially one of this measure.

Twitter / Direct Messages via kwout

It took a sharp-eyed journo who’s very in tune with the workings of social media to spot my Tweet, and before long, the reporters were on their way.

Twitter / Sent Direct Messages via kwout

Twitter / Direct Messages via kwout

So ladies and gentlemen, if you ever need an example about how collaborative Web 2.0 technologies are, and the potential for these technologies, here’s a classic one for you. Cheers, and have a great weekend.

P.S. My reply:

Twitter / Sent Direct Messages via kwout

… those who believe that all content should be free should reflect on who will open bureaus in Baghdad or be able to fly off as freelancers to report in Rwanda under such a system.

I say this not because I am “evil,” which is the description my daughter slings at those who want to charge for their Web content, music or apps. Instead, I say this because my daughter is very creative, and when she gets older, I want her to get paid for producing really neat stuff rather than come to me for money or decide that it makes more sense to be an investment banker.

As a producer of creative work myself, I’m inclined to agree: I don’t want to be a struggling artist, or worse, not producing art at all. At the same, I’m quite perturbed by Isaacson’s stand, for if he had had his way a long time ago, I wouldn’t have reached this stage of my life.

This is because I wouldn’t have had a chance to read widely, and the main reason for my reading widely is because of the Internet, and not having to pay for information on the Internet. So what happens when one starts charging for content then? The laws of demand and supply dictate that some consumers will end up foregoing this content, for whatever reasons might occur. That’s not a pleasant thought in my humble opinion – although I can afford to pay for content now, what about people who will benefit from free information but are unable to pay at this point in time?

I think there’s a middle ground, and the current Straits Times model might be it – let consumers who value the timeliness of news pay a premium for it. Personally, I’m fine with news coming in late; it isn’t important for the news I’m interested in to arrive fresh off the press, and besides, reading blogs does help ameliorate this possible drawback.

I’m not kidding, by the way. Previously, I used to listen to The Mr Brown Show (TMBS) to get my news. My rationale was that the jokes I didn’t get were the gaps in my knowledge which I needed to fill, since satire and parody have to reference real-life events in order for them to work. Now I have Google Reader to aggregate information for me. That’s why I love technology, or tek-no-lo-ghee, as a character on TMBS might call it.

At the same time, Cherian George has written a very thoughtful piece entitled The Future of Journalism in a Post-Newspaper World. It throws up very interesting ideas about the way to go for journalism, including government intervention, if you consider the educational aspect of information as a public good.

For now, I’m just going to read voraciously, as a form of me shaking my fist defiantly at impending doom. Or maybe it’s just the Singaporean in me taking advantage of the freebies. Whatever lah. Anyway, I have miles to go before I sleep, so I’ll do my work first before reading the news.

P.S. On that note, this is duh news I think everyone should read. Okaybye.

From: Ashiq Idris <ashiq@triathlonsingapore.org>
Date: February 6, 2009 11:37:30 AM GMT+08:00
To: Laremy Lee
Subject: Response to your Email
Reply-To: ashiq@triathlonsingapore.org

Dear Laremy,

I am writing to you in response to your email to the Association dated 2 Feb 2009.  Here I would like to clarify on behalf of the Association that the Association had commissioned an independent Panel of Inquiry to look into the case.  Upon completing their inquiry they have submitted their report to the Association which includes their recommendation on the punishment to be imposed.  The TAS Management Committee agreed to adopt the recommendation and subsequently the two athletes were notified on the decision.

I would also like to clarify that the infringement was “Disobeying instruction of the coach” and the punishment given was imposed on the said infringement.  Disobeying instruction is something the Association see very seriously and for that matter most other National Sports Associations.

I hope I have clarify the reason why they were being punished in contrary to what had been reported in the local media and speculated out of proportion.

I would like to thank you for your comments.

Regards,
Ashiq Idris
AGM

Is the case closed? I don’t know, but I still remain firm on my stand: although rules must be followed, this ‘rule’ in particular is archaic and has no place in our day and age. Also, some points to be clarified:

• This isn’t about sex, or indecency, by the way, although many people have mistaken it to be so. Please do not be misled. It’s about jurisprudence, I think, but please let me know if I am using the term wrongly.
• The media did not blow the matter out of proportion. The Straits Times merely reported on the truth, and they did a good job, might I add. The only thing that has been blown out of proportion is the nature and the severity of the punishment – if one is needed at all.
• I think the above two points merely go to show that Singaporeans need a very good grounding in media literacy, and I’m glad the education system is making an attempt to bridge this gap.

In any case, I hope Dinah and Ying Ren keep on training. It would be nice to see them on the global stage someday, because these are two Singaporeans I’d be very proud to support and cheer my lungs out for.

1. We believe STOMP (Straits Times Online Media Print) has more potential for harm than good.
2. It is an unnecessary tool for surveillance, and has resulted in unnecessary intrusions into the private lives of Singaporeans.
3. It infantilises Singaporeans, discouraging them from thinking critically about social issues by encouraging vouyeuristic journalism.
4. STOMP should be shut down for good as it is a detriment toward the proposed establishment of a Renaissance City.
5. Alternatively, it should be revamped so that it promotes critical thought about the social issues of our day.

The Short of It
Shut Down STOMP!

Why?
Your life or the lives of your loved ones could be the next that is/are affected by STOMP’s current brand of ‘journalism’.

The Long of It
Upon its inception, STOMP was hailed as ‘the next new thing’ in citizen journalism in Singapore – it was expected to be a platform for Singaporeans to create news for Singaporeans, by Singaporeans.

However, it seems that the type of ‘news’ that has been covered thus far ranges from the banal to the mundane, to the downrightly outrageous intrusion of privacy into the lives of Singaporeans.

As a result, the website has resulted in the:

• encouragement of the culture of voyeurism in our society;
• inadvertent destruction of the lives of Singaporeans affected by the ‘news’ that STOMP reports on; and the
• possible infantilising of Singapore society by encouraging only a certain type of journalism from citizens;

among other potentiall detrimental effects.

STOMP could do so much more, namely, encouraging a culture of critical thinking through better journalism, which might result in Singaporeans being better able to engage with the social issues of today. However, it has not and will not until we do something about it.

Join the cause today as we work together to stomp out STOMP, or at the very least, facilitate its reformation into a media website that we can all be proud of.

How We Will Do It

1. NOW – Raising awareness of the cause through the use of social media and Web 2.0 technology.
2. NEXT PHASE – Sending appeals or petitions to the people in charge of STOMP until we receive a response from them.

Further Reading

• Is STOMP ‘Citizen Journalism’?