The PM now admits.........
-
HVR:
I have news for our population policy planners. New citizens age too.kwcllf:
This part I do not understand. If Singaporeans are not producing enough babies, then the increase in population must come from immigration. If there is an explosive growth in population, does it not mean that the govt did not manage it properly, which causes the strain in infrastructure?
Yes I think we have too many foreigners. We do need people to support economy and growth. If only we have enough babies and we do not need to allow so many foreigners to come in. I welcome them if they can contribute in whatever ways but I do think not everyone of them can assimilate seamlessly and this will cause us some problems. -
3Boys:
Haha, sorry you just pop up while I type and I hope you don't mind. Well. if people who are supportive of government are all irrational, I don't know whether people should be rational or not anymore. :?
Oops! :oops:HVR:
Nobody can have 20/20 foresight. Who would expect 2003 Sars outbreak? Our country was almost crippled by it and I deeply appreciate how the government tackled the crisis. No resources spared and no chances taken and I don't remember any suggestions or feedback or anything from opposition parties.
With regard to social media, it's a joke sometimes. Bloggers are not too bad, they say what they said and are ultimately responsible for it. Forums, on the other hand, provided an opportunity for people to be irresponsible. I am not saying all forum-ers are irresponsible but I noticed in some other forums, it's practically only anti-establishment views are allowed. If you expressed support for PAP, you will be called names, ridiculed, cursed and so on. Where is the maturity? How to debate in such serious topic as politic if people are not mature?
If you seriously analyze the views shared by some of these forum-ers, you would realize they actually have little views. They are only interested in inciting emotion and generate hatres. Sometime I wonder PAP, why, as a political party, chose to leave all these views unchallenged. I am sure they can get their activists to post objective views and their side of the story in these forums as well. If you want to be heard and defense yourself against all these allegations in the Internet forums, you have to be in the forums. They don't have to respond as government, just someone with different views and someone who want the different views to be heard.
In KSP, can you imagine if we don't have 3boys? It will be one sided as well. Luckily unlike other forums, majority here still debate rationally. I am not saying 3boys is a PAP supporter, he said more than once he had voted for opposition. My point is, generally, Internet forums only contain views that are in support of opposition. It's too one sided and its not healthy in term of objectivity.
PM said social media did not 'moderate' itself and cannot be left to itself. I don't know which way this will go but I agree with PM that the views expressed by the online community are too extremes and I think this is extremely unhealthy.
Now I'm gonna get rained on and be accused of being a closet PAP activist......no rational person could possibly be supportive of the government unless he had some ulterior motive, right? -
HVR:
:goodpost:Nobody can have 20/20 foresight. Who would expect 2003 Sars outbreak? Our country was almost crippled by it and I deeply appreciate how the government tackled the crisis. No resources spared and no chances taken and I don't remember any suggestions or feedback or anything from opposition parties.
With regard to social media, it's a joke sometimes. Bloggers are not too bad, they say what they said and are ultimately responsible for it. Forums, on the other hand, provided an opportunity for people to be irresponsible. I am not saying all forum-ers are irresponsible but I noticed in some other forums, it's practically only anti-establishment views are allowed. If you expressed support for PAP, you will be called names, ridiculed, cursed and so on. Where is the maturity? How to debate in such serious topic as politic if people are not mature?
If you seriously analyze the views shared by some of these forum-ers, you would realize they actually have little views. They are only interested in inciting emotion and generate hatres. Sometime I wonder PAP, why, as a political party, chose to leave all these views unchallenged. I am sure they can get their activists to post objective views and their side of the story in these forums as well. If you want to be heard and defense yourself against all these allegations in the Internet forums, you have to be in the forums. They don't have to respond as government, just someone with different views and someone who want the different views to be heard.
In KSP, can you imagine if we don't have 3boys? It will be one sided as well. Luckily unlike other forums, majority here still debate rationally. I am not saying 3boys is a PAP supporter, he said more than once he had voted for opposition. My point is, generally, Internet forums only contain views that are in support of opposition. It's too one sided and its not healthy in term of objectivity.
PM said social media did not 'moderate' itself and cannot be left to itself. I don't know which way this will go but I agree with PM that the views expressed by the online community are too extremes and I think this is extremely unhealthy. -
HVR:
Actually I'll like to think that the reason why the online community is mostly anti establishment is because MSM is too skewed on the other side. So people with grunts and grouses can only turn online because everywhere in MSM is singing the same tune. And most people feel that there is no need to offer the establishment point of view because the MSM is flooded with them.Nobody can have 20/20 foresight. Who would expect 2003 Sars outbreak? Our country was almost crippled by it and I deeply appreciate how the government tackled the crisis. No resources spared and no chances taken and I don't remember any suggestions or feedback or anything from opposition parties.
With regard to social media, it's a joke sometimes. Bloggers are not too bad, they say what they said and are ultimately responsible for it. Forums, on the other hand, provided an opportunity for people to be irresponsible. I am not saying all forum-ers are irresponsible but I noticed in some other forums, it's practically only anti-establishment views are allowed. If you expressed support for PAP, you will be called names, ridiculed, cursed and so on. Where is the maturity? How to debate in such serious topic as politic if people are not mature?
If you seriously analyze the views shared by some of these forum-ers, you would realize they actually have little views. They are only interested in inciting emotion and generate hatres. Sometime I wonder PAP, why, as a political party, chose to leave all these views unchallenged. I am sure they can get their activists to post objective views and their side of the story in these forums as well. If you want to be heard and defense yourself against all these allegations in the Internet forums, you have to be in the forums. They don't have to respond as government, just someone with different views and someone who want the different views to be heard.
In KSP, can you imagine if we don't have 3boys? It will be one sided as well. Luckily unlike other forums, majority here still debate rationally. I am not saying 3boys is a PAP supporter, he said more than once he had voted for opposition. My point is, generally, Internet forums only contain views that are in support of opposition. It's too one sided and its not healthy in term of objectivity.
PM said social media did not 'moderate' itself and cannot be left to itself. I don't know which way this will go but I agree with PM that the views expressed by the online community are too extremes and I think this is extremely unhealthy.
I'll like to think that if the MSM is allowed to offer a better balance of views, it will not drive only disgruntled people online.
So better balance of views online and in MSM should be our ultimate aim. -
Dora1:
:goodpost:
Actually I'll like to think that the reason why the online community is mostly anti establishment is because MSM is too skewed on the other side. So people with grunts and grouses can only turn online because everywhere in MSM is singing the same tune. And most people feel that there is no need to offer the establishment point of view because the MSM is flooded with them.
I'll like to think that if the MSM is allowed to offer a better balance of views, it will not drive only disgruntled people online.
So better balance of views online and in MSM should be our ultimate aim. -
Dora1:
I beg to differ. Just pick up a copy of ST and you will find many forum letters are critical of government. There are also many insightful columns hitting hard at the inadequacies of the government policies. The different between ST forum letters and columns with that of online community is that the former are more balance and constructive. If you will, today there is another excellent piece of article on why LTK is playing down the PE victory. Balanced views, nothing pro government or pro opposition. Fact is, many in the online community had proudly declared they don't read newspapers anymore. They are happy with one sided view in the online community. Is this healthy?
Actually I'll like to think that the reason why the online community is mostly anti establishment is because MSM is too skewed on the other side. So people with grunts and grouses can only turn online because everywhere in MSM is singing the same tune. And most people feel that there is no need to offer the establishment point of view because the MSM is flooded with them.HVR:
Nobody can have 20/20 foresight. Who would expect 2003 Sars outbreak? Our country was almost crippled by it and I deeply appreciate how the government tackled the crisis. No resources spared and no chances taken and I don't remember any suggestions or feedback or anything from opposition parties.
With regard to social media, it's a joke sometimes. Bloggers are not too bad, they say what they said and are ultimately responsible for it. Forums, on the other hand, provided an opportunity for people to be irresponsible. I am not saying all forum-ers are irresponsible but I noticed in some other forums, it's practically only anti-establishment views are allowed. If you expressed support for PAP, you will be called names, ridiculed, cursed and so on. Where is the maturity? How to debate in such serious topic as politic if people are not mature?
If you seriously analyze the views shared by some of these forum-ers, you would realize they actually have little views. They are only interested in inciting emotion and generate hatres. Sometime I wonder PAP, why, as a political party, chose to leave all these views unchallenged. I am sure they can get their activists to post objective views and their side of the story in these forums as well. If you want to be heard and defense yourself against all these allegations in the Internet forums, you have to be in the forums. They don't have to respond as government, just someone with different views and someone who want the different views to be heard.
In KSP, can you imagine if we don't have 3boys? It will be one sided as well. Luckily unlike other forums, majority here still debate rationally. I am not saying 3boys is a PAP supporter, he said more than once he had voted for opposition. My point is, generally, Internet forums only contain views that are in support of opposition. It's too one sided and its not healthy in term of objectivity.
PM said social media did not 'moderate' itself and cannot be left to itself. I don't know which way this will go but I agree with PM that the views expressed by the online community are too extremes and I think this is extremely unhealthy.
I'll like to think that if the MSM is allowed to offer a better balance of views, it will not drive only disgruntled people online.
So better balance of views online and in MSM should be our ultimate aim. -
3Boys:
If you support PAP for the correct reason, why not? :evil:
Oops! :oops:
Now I'm gonna get rained on and be accused of being a closet PAP activist......no rational person could possibly be supportive of the government unless he had some ulterior motive, right?
But if someone does it bcoz he worry the votes could be traced and he is civil servant etc... That is bad....... -
HVR:
http://www.straitstimes.com/premium/forum-letters/story/workers-party-lacks-minority-representation-20130128
Balanced views, nothing pro government or pro opposition.
ST publish these type of letters.. This is called balanced views? did ST even verify the facts? Not anti-Opp? -
limlim:
We have GRC and I am not concern there will be lack of minority representation regardless who formed the government in future. Maybe the writer did not see enough WP minority on the ground and felt compelled to raise his concern? In any case it gives WP a platform to respond, which they duly did. Balanced, in my view cos we also get to hear from WP.
http://www.straitstimes.com/premium/forum-letters/story/workers-party-lacks-minority-representation-20130128HVR:
Balanced views, nothing pro government or pro opposition.
ST publish these type of letters.. This is called balanced views? did ST even verify the facts? Not anti-Opp? -
HVR:
I agree that comments on online forums can get extreme, and it is an undeniable fact!
I beg to differ. Just pick up a copy of ST and you will find many forum letters are critical of government. There are also many insightful columns hitting hard at the inadequacies of the government policies. The different between ST forum letters and columns with that of online community is that the former are more balance and constructive. If you will, today there is another excellent piece of article on why LTK is playing down the PE victory. Balanced views, nothing pro government or pro opposition. Fact is, many in the online community had proudly declared they don't read newspapers anymore. They are happy with one sided view in the online community. Is this healthy?
But then, mainstream media pick and choose what to publish. Of course, they have to sieve out the extreme ones but, there were also cases where good comments/feedback were thrown out.
Just a case in point. About 2 yeara back, I went to the Comex Fair after seeing an \"incredible\" offer for mobile & handset plan. I rushed down and only on the spot that I was told that I needed to sign up another plan before I could be entitled to the \"offer\". I questioned the Telco's staff there and asked why wasn't the T&C clearly printed on the brochures and newspaper advertisements. He could not answer me and he got a manager to speak to me. When I asked him the same question, he could not answer me as well. Then the manager got the Roadshow Manager to talk to me. I was then told by him that \"this is how we do thing!\" This is really incredulous and I told him straight off this is misleading and downright cheating from a major Telco here!
I wrote to ST and it did not reply. Then I wrote to IDA, which subsequently contacted the Telco. A senior staff from the Telco then called me to apologise and said \"next time, we will ensure the proper info is printed clearly\". She then went on to offer me a discount to my subscription.
I think this case shows the Telco was clearly misleading consumers but yet was able to get away with it. I think the gravity of this case should also be published so that the General Public would not be deceived by such underhand method, but still ST did not deem it good enough to be published!
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better š
Register Login