Those of you who have read Mr. Wang's post will know that I was invited to appear on a CNA talkshow regarding politicians blogging. I guess the cat is out of the bag so there is no point in me keeping hush hush about it here, as I did on my previous TV appearances (did not want the scrutiny, ironic I know). Yes, I did accept, and in fact I just returned from the recording. It was interesting and fun (I have worked with the producers etc. who run the show before and they are a wonderful bunch of people) but the show itself, I am afraid, might be rather lacklustre. One or two questions I asked led to some interesting soundbites, but I generally kept quiet because honestly, I had nothing to say for most of it; it was all very politically correct and meditated. There are some gems though, probably booboos on my part hehe. "Gayle, do you read the Minister's blog?" "Umm, at first, but then not really." "Why not?" "Well... (long pause as I tried to figure out how to say this nicely) I only read things that hold my interest (OOPS!)." If you do catch the show, also watch out for when I ask him about opposition politicians and new media like podcasts and (tongue-in-cheek) sound amplification devices in public. Hope these things will survive the cuts and edits. Cos otherwise, I CONFESS, I was boring.
BG Yeo himself seems a nice man - soft-spoken, mild-mannered, with a faintly bewildered and endearing air about him. Don't be fooled though, he is certainly sharp and knows his business. We chatted after the show about a range of topics I must confess were much more interesting than the theme for the show ("Should politicians blog?" Sure, why not, who cares? Just another fish in the big blue sea), including the conscription of women and genetics. Well really I say 'chatted' but it was more like him talking with a few of us offering the occasional comment. BG Yeo has one thing in common with all other ministers I've met in person -- they talk slowly and at great length, making it difficult to interject, or feel like you should at all.
Every. Thing. They. Say. Carries. Much. Pomp. And. Gravitas. Like. Every. Word. Really. Means. Something. (How to talk like a minister 101).
My fellow guest was Bernard Leong from Singapore Angle, who was even more reticent than I was. What struck me the most about this episode, really, had little to do with the show itself. It had more to do with Mr. Wang's post. I must say I entirely disagree with his take on this issue.
BG Yeo himself seems a nice man - soft-spoken, mild-mannered, with a faintly bewildered and endearing air about him. Don't be fooled though, he is certainly sharp and knows his business. We chatted after the show about a range of topics I must confess were much more interesting than the theme for the show ("Should politicians blog?" Sure, why not, who cares? Just another fish in the big blue sea), including the conscription of women and genetics. Well really I say 'chatted' but it was more like him talking with a few of us offering the occasional comment. BG Yeo has one thing in common with all other ministers I've met in person -- they talk slowly and at great length, making it difficult to interject, or feel like you should at all.
Every. Thing. They. Say. Carries. Much. Pomp. And. Gravitas. Like. Every. Word. Really. Means. Something. (How to talk like a minister 101).
My fellow guest was Bernard Leong from Singapore Angle, who was even more reticent than I was. What struck me the most about this episode, really, had little to do with the show itself. It had more to do with Mr. Wang's post. I must say I entirely disagree with his take on this issue.
"One year ago, an opportunity like this would have been really exciting to me. To appear on TV! And talk about blogs! With a PAP minister! Well, that was one year ago.
And one year in Internet time feels like 10 years in the offline world. Since then the Singapore blogosphere has come a long way. Bloggers are no longer going to burst with surprise, delight or alarm just because the mainstream media or the government wants to talk to them." -- Mr. Wang
And one year in Internet time feels like 10 years in the offline world. Since then the Singapore blogosphere has come a long way. Bloggers are no longer going to burst with surprise, delight or alarm just because the mainstream media or the government wants to talk to them." -- Mr. Wang
I am rather confused by Mr. Wang's train of thought here. He acknowledges that the blogosphere has come a long way. To me, this is a positive thing, and something to be celebrated. Granted, I am turned off sometimes by how blogging has become the 'in-thing' and also by the wave of attention paid to blog(ger)s in the form of flattery, critique and even imitation (STOMP!) by mainstream media. Nevertheless, one can't help but admit that this is a net benefit to the blogosphere regardless of my personal sensibilities, especially with regards to my own personal cause of citizen participation in politics, which I should hope Mr. Wang shares, when the focus turns on to citizens with something to say about socio-political issues and the interaction between the government and the people.
Mr. Wang makes it sound like it is a trivial, unimportant and passe that an opportunity is given for a blogger to speak face to face with a politician. Well it is not unimportant. Will it change the world? Of course not. Will it change anything? Not directly. But is it worth three hours of your time? Yes, definitely. Bloggers often feel themselves to be at liberty to pass comment on political issues and politicians. They do have, and must have, that liberty. But I cannot help but feel that their commentary and criticisms would be taken so much further, and would be delivered/crafted which so much more insight and clear-mindedness, if they were willing to step up and say these things openly and face to face with the person/policymaker they are criticizing, so that the latter will have the right of reply and also so that you, as a commentator, do justice to your views.
The right of reply is a wondrous thing. How many clamoured for Mr. Brown to have access to it over the TODAY article and the subsequent loss of his job? Politicians should not be excepted from this right. Because when a reply is made, it means it is no longer one man shouting at a brick wall of bureaucracy or the iron curtain of politics. A reply means it is a conversation. A lot of insecurity can come with that on both sides because now one's views can be challenged, upset, overturned, undermined. But it is a necessary step to shortening the divide between government and people. And it would be a grave mistake for us to think that we do not need this step, or that we have heard all there is to hear from the official channels. I have never walked away from a conversation with a politician or a civil servant without having learnt something. It does not mean that I am converted to their thought - often I come away with new points of disagreement. But my perspective is always developed, because it has ventured out of its safety zone, and dared to engage. If we become blase and disinterested, distancing ourselves, then is it really the government's fault when we complain of an affective divide?
Comments like this excerpt reinforce the perception of an all-powerful conspiring government and its lapdog politicians. Is there truth in it? Maybe, maybe not. As it stands, it is little more than speculative derision. Yes, it is an opinion, and has a right to exist. But perhaps it would be more fair to those involved if we did not turn down opportunities to say these things straight to those we judge so easily in the comfort of our homes. Furthermore, the opportunity to quiz ministers directly on the issue helps the debate to evolve. BG Yeo acknowledged, straight to the point when asked, that yes, blogging is indeed a way of reaching young voters, and is a new medium which should be embraced for that purpose. When something like that is admitted candidly, then we can move on to asking questions like -- is this move a good thing, and does it make our political system more healthy, or detract from it? -- rather than stagnating on the same accusations without receiving confirmation or denial.
Now, please note, this is not directed at those who may not have opportunities to address politicians on all their issues of concern. Rather, this is an appeal to those bloggers whom I know to have specifically declined the chance to have their views heard in other avenues. Bloggers whom I consider smart, savvy, able to hold their own in a debate, and more experienced. When the media contact me, they more often than not mention that you have declined the chance to say your piece, or that they have received no reply. Some of you have valid reasons. I was told that Alex Au of Yawningbread, for instance, did not accept a slot on the show because he simply had no real opinion on the issue. Fair enough, though I would love to see Alex on TV giving as good as he gets or better. I have worked with him a couple of times and he is charming, smart and forthright in his views; a man who would add expertise and confidence to any discussion. But if you are declining because you feel there is no point in talking with 'the establishment', or because you would rather remain safely incognito/distanced from a political arena perceived as dangerous, then I appeal to you NOT to. Xenoboy, Mr. Wang, Mr. Brown, and other notoriously uncontactable bloggers -- you know who you are. Your efforts would really help to bring us to new levels of debate and citizen representation over a broad range of Singaporeans. Cheers all, and goodnight.
Mr. Wang makes it sound like it is a trivial, unimportant and passe that an opportunity is given for a blogger to speak face to face with a politician. Well it is not unimportant. Will it change the world? Of course not. Will it change anything? Not directly. But is it worth three hours of your time? Yes, definitely. Bloggers often feel themselves to be at liberty to pass comment on political issues and politicians. They do have, and must have, that liberty. But I cannot help but feel that their commentary and criticisms would be taken so much further, and would be delivered/crafted which so much more insight and clear-mindedness, if they were willing to step up and say these things openly and face to face with the person/policymaker they are criticizing, so that the latter will have the right of reply and also so that you, as a commentator, do justice to your views.
The right of reply is a wondrous thing. How many clamoured for Mr. Brown to have access to it over the TODAY article and the subsequent loss of his job? Politicians should not be excepted from this right. Because when a reply is made, it means it is no longer one man shouting at a brick wall of bureaucracy or the iron curtain of politics. A reply means it is a conversation. A lot of insecurity can come with that on both sides because now one's views can be challenged, upset, overturned, undermined. But it is a necessary step to shortening the divide between government and people. And it would be a grave mistake for us to think that we do not need this step, or that we have heard all there is to hear from the official channels. I have never walked away from a conversation with a politician or a civil servant without having learnt something. It does not mean that I am converted to their thought - often I come away with new points of disagreement. But my perspective is always developed, because it has ventured out of its safety zone, and dared to engage. If we become blase and disinterested, distancing ourselves, then is it really the government's fault when we complain of an affective divide?
"The TV show will probably be a good chance for George Yeo to publicise his own blogging attempts (on Beyond SG and Ephraim Loy's blog). George Yeo has been blogging diligently for the past few months. But after the initial burst of public interest, hardly anyone bothers to read him anymore.
But I bet George will keep on trying. So will the post-65 MPs. After all, remember what PM Lee Hsien Loong had prescribed? The PAP needs to be more hip and happening, and the government needs to use "new" media to reach out to the masses.
The leader has spoken. And so the show must go on." -- Mr. Wang
But I bet George will keep on trying. So will the post-65 MPs. After all, remember what PM Lee Hsien Loong had prescribed? The PAP needs to be more hip and happening, and the government needs to use "new" media to reach out to the masses.
The leader has spoken. And so the show must go on." -- Mr. Wang
Comments like this excerpt reinforce the perception of an all-powerful conspiring government and its lapdog politicians. Is there truth in it? Maybe, maybe not. As it stands, it is little more than speculative derision. Yes, it is an opinion, and has a right to exist. But perhaps it would be more fair to those involved if we did not turn down opportunities to say these things straight to those we judge so easily in the comfort of our homes. Furthermore, the opportunity to quiz ministers directly on the issue helps the debate to evolve. BG Yeo acknowledged, straight to the point when asked, that yes, blogging is indeed a way of reaching young voters, and is a new medium which should be embraced for that purpose. When something like that is admitted candidly, then we can move on to asking questions like -- is this move a good thing, and does it make our political system more healthy, or detract from it? -- rather than stagnating on the same accusations without receiving confirmation or denial.
Now, please note, this is not directed at those who may not have opportunities to address politicians on all their issues of concern. Rather, this is an appeal to those bloggers whom I know to have specifically declined the chance to have their views heard in other avenues. Bloggers whom I consider smart, savvy, able to hold their own in a debate, and more experienced. When the media contact me, they more often than not mention that you have declined the chance to say your piece, or that they have received no reply. Some of you have valid reasons. I was told that Alex Au of Yawningbread, for instance, did not accept a slot on the show because he simply had no real opinion on the issue. Fair enough, though I would love to see Alex on TV giving as good as he gets or better. I have worked with him a couple of times and he is charming, smart and forthright in his views; a man who would add expertise and confidence to any discussion. But if you are declining because you feel there is no point in talking with 'the establishment', or because you would rather remain safely incognito/distanced from a political arena perceived as dangerous, then I appeal to you NOT to. Xenoboy, Mr. Wang, Mr. Brown, and other notoriously uncontactable bloggers -- you know who you are. Your efforts would really help to bring us to new levels of debate and citizen representation over a broad range of Singaporeans. Cheers all, and goodnight.
