wassup with mr brown?
wassup with l'infantile terrible of singapore?
before i get to that, let me sidetrack. i think mr brown and PCB have alot in common. he's l'infantile terrible of singapore, PCB's l'infantile terrible of RJC! hahahahaha.
if you dunno why i say that, or haven't heard of theinfamous PCB gang, perhaps u would like to visit the wonderful PCB blog here at www.pcbsyndicate.blogspot.com and check out the latest stunt that PCB pulled off. LOL. it can be BEST DESCRIBED AS "WTF". SERIOUSLY. (need to scroll down till u find pictures)
ANYWAYS. back to mr brown. this guy's column in Today got suspended. he's well known for his political satires so obviously one of the responses would be the uneducated response and it would be along the lines of "there, there, there! knn see the gahmen trying to silence him, so ban his column".
well then u are most probably just a blind opposition supporter. cause a pro-PAP or even neutral (and normal, not to mention educated response) would be "o.O what did he do (wrong)?", instead of immediately jumping into conclusions, bitches.
of course we have to look at both sides of the story, so i surfed mrbrown.com yesterday (+ downloaded alot of podcasts. funny. LOL) and read quite a number of his articles. i think his humour is slightly better than rockson's. lol.
then i read his article in TODAY. the one that got him banned. and i didn't laugh at all. it wasn't funny like his previous ones. this one was different. it has that sarcastic, negative tone about it. it felt angsty. check it out for urself here. http://www.mrbrown.com/blog/2006/07/today_sporeans_.html
it doesn't take one much to realise that. unless of course u're just another uneducated piece of shit, as mentioned above. if u read the article just like any other GP/english comprehension passage, one that would probably have "What is the author's tone throughout the article?" as one of its 2 mark questions, u SHOULD detect the dark, sarcastic, even provocative tone of his. this is rather unlike him, i must stress again.
what's gone wrong with him? did he finally realise that he was writing an article for a national newspaper hence he decided to take matters into his own hands and sway from his usual satricial, humorous, yet not-over-the-line writing style? maybe we'll never know.
anyway, here's the much criticised letter from MICA (Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts). again, i do not see anything wrong with what K Bhavani has tried to put across. some of those who criticised her letter probably didn't even read much of it -.- in bold is what i thought was really true and i agreed upon totally.
Letter from K BHAVANI
Press Secretary to the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts
Your mr brown column, "S'poreans are fed, up with progress!" (June 30) poured sarcasm on many issues, including the recent General Household Survey, price increases in electricity tariffs and taxi fares, our IT plans, the Progress Package and means testing for special school fees.
The results of the General Household Survey were only available after the General Election. But similar data from the Household Expenditure Survey had been published last year before the election.
There was no reason to suppress the information. It confirmed what we had told Singaporeans all along, that globalisation would stretch out incomes.
mr brown must also know that price increases in electricity tariffs and taxi fares are the inevitable result of higher oil prices.
These were precisely the reasons for the Progress Package — to help lower income Singaporeans cope with higher costs of living.
Our IT plans are critical to Singapore's competitive position and will improve the job chances of individual Singaporeans. It is wrong of mr brown to make light of them.
As for means testing for special school fees, we understand mr brown's disappointment as the father of an autistic child. However, with means testing, we can devote more resources to families who need more help. (//side note, just like bursaries are for poorer ones right? common sense-.-)
mr brown's views on all these issues distort the truth (/side note, this is contestable since we dun really know what's the actual truth) .They are polemics dressed up as analysis, blaming the Government for all that he is unhappy with. He offers no alternatives or solutions. His piece is calculated to encourage cynicism and despondency, which can only make things worse, not better, for those he professes to sympathise with. (//I TOTALLY 100% AGREE WITH THE 2 STATEMENTS. U wanna criticise, then bloody hell give solutions or suggestions on how to tackle the problem.)
mr brown is entitled to his views. But opinions which are widely circulated in a regular column in a serious newspaper should meet higher standards. Instead of a diatribe mr brown should offer constructive criticism and alternatives. And he should come out from behind his pseudonym to defend his views openly. (//what more can i say? spot-on.)
It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government. If a columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while exploiting his access to the mass media (//this was EXACTLY what i had suggested earlier) to undermine the Government's standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics.
before i get to that, let me sidetrack. i think mr brown and PCB have alot in common. he's l'infantile terrible of singapore, PCB's l'infantile terrible of RJC! hahahahaha.
if you dunno why i say that, or haven't heard of the
ANYWAYS. back to mr brown. this guy's column in Today got suspended. he's well known for his political satires so obviously one of the responses would be the uneducated response and it would be along the lines of "there, there, there! knn see the gahmen trying to silence him, so ban his column".
well then u are most probably just a blind opposition supporter. cause a pro-PAP or even neutral (and normal, not to mention educated response) would be "o.O what did he do (wrong)?", instead of immediately jumping into conclusions, bitches.
of course we have to look at both sides of the story, so i surfed mrbrown.com yesterday (+ downloaded alot of podcasts. funny. LOL) and read quite a number of his articles. i think his humour is slightly better than rockson's. lol.
then i read his article in TODAY. the one that got him banned. and i didn't laugh at all. it wasn't funny like his previous ones. this one was different. it has that sarcastic, negative tone about it. it felt angsty. check it out for urself here. http://www.mrbrown.com/blog/2006/07/today_sporeans_.html
it doesn't take one much to realise that. unless of course u're just another uneducated piece of shit, as mentioned above. if u read the article just like any other GP/english comprehension passage, one that would probably have "What is the author's tone throughout the article?" as one of its 2 mark questions, u SHOULD detect the dark, sarcastic, even provocative tone of his. this is rather unlike him, i must stress again.
what's gone wrong with him? did he finally realise that he was writing an article for a national newspaper hence he decided to take matters into his own hands and sway from his usual satricial, humorous, yet not-over-the-line writing style? maybe we'll never know.
anyway, here's the much criticised letter from MICA (Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts). again, i do not see anything wrong with what K Bhavani has tried to put across. some of those who criticised her letter probably didn't even read much of it -.- in bold is what i thought was really true and i agreed upon totally.
Letter from K BHAVANI
Press Secretary to the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts
Your mr brown column, "S'poreans are fed, up with progress!" (June 30) poured sarcasm on many issues, including the recent General Household Survey, price increases in electricity tariffs and taxi fares, our IT plans, the Progress Package and means testing for special school fees.
The results of the General Household Survey were only available after the General Election. But similar data from the Household Expenditure Survey had been published last year before the election.
There was no reason to suppress the information. It confirmed what we had told Singaporeans all along, that globalisation would stretch out incomes.
mr brown must also know that price increases in electricity tariffs and taxi fares are the inevitable result of higher oil prices.
These were precisely the reasons for the Progress Package — to help lower income Singaporeans cope with higher costs of living.
Our IT plans are critical to Singapore's competitive position and will improve the job chances of individual Singaporeans. It is wrong of mr brown to make light of them.
As for means testing for special school fees, we understand mr brown's disappointment as the father of an autistic child. However, with means testing, we can devote more resources to families who need more help. (//side note, just like bursaries are for poorer ones right? common sense-.-)
mr brown's views on all these issues distort the truth (/side note, this is contestable since we dun really know what's the actual truth) .They are polemics dressed up as analysis, blaming the Government for all that he is unhappy with. He offers no alternatives or solutions. His piece is calculated to encourage cynicism and despondency, which can only make things worse, not better, for those he professes to sympathise with. (//I TOTALLY 100% AGREE WITH THE 2 STATEMENTS. U wanna criticise, then bloody hell give solutions or suggestions on how to tackle the problem.)
mr brown is entitled to his views. But opinions which are widely circulated in a regular column in a serious newspaper should meet higher standards. Instead of a diatribe mr brown should offer constructive criticism and alternatives. And he should come out from behind his pseudonym to defend his views openly. (//what more can i say? spot-on.)
It is not the role of journalists or newspapers in Singapore to champion issues, or campaign for or against the Government. If a columnist presents himself as a non-political observer, while exploiting his access to the mass media (//this was EXACTLY what i had suggested earlier) to undermine the Government's standing with the electorate, then he is no longer a constructive critic, but a partisan player in politics.
posted by desperadoz. at 6:46 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home