We teach critical thinking through propaganda
Monday, September 14, 2009 at 5:49PM Our Minister for Information, Communication and Arts, Rear-Admiral Lui Tuck Yew, professed his love for the compliant and obedient, unabashed government mouthpiece mainstream media:
Unlike some foreign newspapers, the media here in Singapore has not gone for aggressive journalism; they have not gone for aggressive campaigning. They have taken the position that they will investigate thoroughly before they publish.
That probably has nothing to do with a complete monopoly of the mainstream press, nor the fact that it is not an independent media. Nope. Who needs to be aggressive when there is no competition? However, take a look at the average consumer of local mainstream media: they buy into it, hook, line and sinker. When we have an uninformed citizenry, it is little wonder that our government loves the tool that enforces such ignorance. ST is now trying to get schools to use its Forum letters to teach national education:
The use of media articles as a dynamic, relevant source for teaching will be among the tips and ideas teachers will share at The Straits Times’ fourth annual Teachers Forum on Sept 24.
The forum will begin with two plenary sessions on the benefits of using authentic materials like newspapers to develop critical thinking.
I can only laugh while pointing out two obvious problems. First, if you need to establish mainstream media as dynamic, relevant and authentic, it has already failed. Second, using ST Forum letters to inspire critical thinking? Someone is clearly not thinking. You cannot develop critical thinking without questioning everything and everyone aggressively, which is a duty of journalism that the ST has failed for as long as I can remember. This is about as effective as trying to extinguish a barn fire by pissing on it.
The state of the media in Singapore is deplorable, with the mainstream media an placid and complacent channel for government spin and aggressive questioning left to the independent bloggers. What we need is a strong, independent press. If that has to spring from the roots of the individual blogs, then so be it. It would be foolish to depend on this government to relinquish control of any potential debate, and wishful thinking instead of strong action will only result in a bleak future for this country.
Callan Tham
A commenter had accurately pointed out that I picked the ST Forum letters and equated it with the teachers using them to "develop critical thinking". Having read through the source articles, my post and his comments again, I found that indeed I had equated them wrongly, so I will clarify my point.
My gripe is with the branding of the Straits Times as "authentic materials", especially given its pro-government reporting. The ST Forum is tightly moderated, and only letters deemed "safe" will be published. It was wrong for me to imply that the published letters to the ST Forum will be a large part of the source, though in my mind the letters will also be used in conjunction with the entire publication.
Therefore, I concede that I was in error in equating that, but stand by my judgment that the ST Forum letters will be used as a "authentic" source of material for classroom plans.
Reader Comments (9)
"They have taken the position that they will investigate thoroughly before they publish."
ROFL.
"They have taken the position that they will investigate thoroughly before they publish."
It might be true that they have investigated very thoroughly. They have investigated how publish the truth will impact Leegime's financial bottleneck, how it will exposed the government of incompetency, wayang and self-serving, how it expedite the Leegime's doom and downfall etc. So after all these thorough investigations, they then publish the SPH to speak lies, half-truth, rhetorics and rubbish that insult people's intelligence and naiveness.
Now do you know the real reason why the constant and increasing need for foreign talent?
"Second, using ST Forum letters to inspire critical thinking? Someone is clearly not thinking. "
Aiyo-yo. You mean yourself? The quote to which you refer us says nothing about using ST Forum letters for the purpose which you state.
Read properly leh!
It is naive to suggest that they will specifically exclude ST Forum letters as part of the whole promotion, since it is part of the paper. It is the only section that remotely resembles criticism of the government. But since you seem to be implying that they won't be used for the stated purpose, I will be happy to be proven wrong by evidence you supply other than taking what ST says at face value.
Hi Callan,
You miss my point. It is neither about my naivete, nor about your foresight.
It's about the use of the quote, which you took the trouble to highlight in bold, and your comprehension of it: your claim doesn't bear out.
Regards.
Having re-read the source articles, what I posted and your comment, I concede that I had jumped into it; an update will be posted to clarify my point of view.
Thank you, you answered the question I have been searching for which was whether or not to place keywords when blog commenting.
there is a thin line between aggressive journalism and propoganda
photography equipment rental