January 16, 2007
~ 01:46
NeW iNsiGhts~
aFteR aBandoNin aLL...
mY neWsPapeRs foR 2 whoLe moNtHs...
aLLowiN theM to piLe uP n roT...
i fiNaLLy picKed theM up todaY...
n this particular arTicLe caUght my eYe...
it was aN exCeRpT...
frM a new BooK...
CoNfessions oF an American Media MaN
wriTTeN bY a veTeraN...
aMeRicaN jouRnaLisT - ToM PLaTe
iT waS bouT hiS 1st visiT to S'pore...
in the 1990s n his inTerView wiTh...
tHeN SenioR MinisTeR Lee Kuan Yew...
tHe heaDinG reaDs...
"This column on Singapore,
are you sure you want it to run?"
iF u haVe the Straits Times dateD 15 JaN...
u suRe gotta reaD iT~
tHe waY thiS guY wriTes is reaL inteResTin~
NaT...u r suRe goinG to LoVe iT~
LeT me giVe u soMe iNsiGhts...
In the 1990s...the aMericaNs did noT haVe...
a gD oPinioN bouT S'pore...
buT a sTudeNt oF hiS toLd hiM to...
VisiT S'poRe & meeT a poLitiCaL GeniuS...
naMed Lee KuaN Yew...
... -->dOts MeaNs sKip to~
[ ]> --> woRds in braCkeTs aRe my owN oPiNioNs...
abstract oF aBsTraCt:
The seeming duality of the place - the contrast between
enviable achievements and questionable process - fascinated me;
so did the political enigma of Lee Kuan Yew, who, to say the least,
had not received a very good press in the United States, at least
in the 1990s.
I decided to call on the government of Singapore and phoned to ask
for a journalist's visa so as to travel there for a column or two.
Initially - and to my surprise - they were not enthusiastic. "Oh sure,
we know what you're going to do," said the government official who
handled the foreign press. "You're going to come to Singapore, you're
going to spend 2.1 days here, you're going to write 3.1 articles and
you're going to mention that caning incident 17.6 times." [cHucKLe]
...I had reviewed the Los Angeles Times (LAT) database of previous
columns and stories, and found that the vast majority of those done in
recent years (or ever!) had focused on Singapore's use of caning as
criminal punishment and social deterrence, and about its first know
American recipient thereof, the notorious Micheal Fay.
He was more or less a typical young irresponsible America goofball who
decided to publicly display his spray-painting skills on walls and cars in
a political culture whose entire goal was absolute public respect for
authority - and control of deviance of almost all kinds. [diaOz...buT
so truE] In such a small and well-policed city state, the young American
was quickly arrested and promptly sentenced to a handful of whacks
from the strict Singaporean caning rod. [LoL!]
The US media outcry was instantly condemnatory. How primitive! How
animalistic! But it never occured to the American media so loudly
lynching Singapore - and telling it how to run its affairs - that America
public opinion was far more in favour against this practice, probably
because we wish we could be at least a little sterner with our own
errant children, perhaps even without getting slapped with an ACLU
(American Civilian Liberties Union) lawsuit.
..."Okay, I'll make you a deal," I said. "I'll stay 5.0 days, a whole work
week. I won't go to Malaysia, I won't go to Indonesia, I won't go
anywhere else in Asia during that time. I'll look, I'll learn and I'll write
one column in which I'll likely only bring up caning once because, as
an American journalist, I'm going to have to mention your caning law
at least once or I'll lose my journalistic licence!"
I was joking, of course, or was I? Of course, American journalists don't
have to be licensed, but should they be? Now, that's an interesting
question; and you might be surprised by my answer!
[oH maN~ i'm loviN thiS maN's humouR as e articLe goes oN~]
[so thiS maN goT hiS deaL anD even meT Mr Lee KuaN Yew at Istana...]
...The interview was long and deep. Instead of the 45 minutes I was
scheduled for, Singapore's founding prime minister laid out his views
for nearly two pleasant but intense hours, replying to every one of my
questions with astonishing precision, careful thoughtfulness and a
charming British lilt acquired in his years as a Cambridge student
in England.
What was the biggest problem he faced when he and his People's
Action Party began to piece Singapore back together in the 1960s?
Surprisingly, Lee said it wasn't the economy, national security nor public
schools, but rather the omnipresent, oppressive, lawless, marauding
drug gangs who roamed the streets, terrorised the citizenry and kept
the decent people of Singapore indoors at night.
The British had largely ignored the gangsters during their reign. As a
result of this debilitating carte blanche, the problem mushroomed into
a living nightmare. Roaming gangs controlled the streets not only by
night but also by the day, and the threat of being an innocent but dead
bystander in a drug gang gun battle or drive-by was real. It was
impossible to build a peaceful society with that kind of arrant
misconduct, insisted Lee.
I asked him what he did to combat the gangs.
"We had the army arrest them and put them in jail."
"So, how did the trials go?" I asked, reasonably.
"We didn't have trials," the senior statesman replied directly.
"What?!" I tried to seem unruffled but i think i failed. My Americanness
was shinning through too obviously.
"You see, Tom, we inherited the British system of justice which
requires the first-person testimony of one gang member to convict
another one. But the gangs would kill off anybody who talked, so what
developed was a revolving door system in which an arrest would be made
and there'd be a trial which hinged on the testimony of a witness who
then would be killed by agents of the indicted gangsters, and out the
door would go the criminals, back onto the streets."
"Why couldn't the police protect the witnesses?"
"They weren't strong enough."
"So what did you do?"
"We let the army round them up and put the gang members in
jail," Lee said.
"So, where are they today?"
"By and large, they are still in jail."
"But that's preposterous!"
He looked at me in the eye clearly and evenly, and said directly,
without a trace of apology: "Mr Plate, haven't you noticed? The streets
of Singapore are safe." [WaY to GO~!!!]
He had me there...
...I left the interview convinced that Lee Kuan Yew - love him or hate him
- had an exceptional mind and a very steely will. [u couLd saY tt aGaiN~]
I banged out my Singapore column from the gorgeous Shangri-La Hotel,
faxed and e-mailed it to the LAT, and went to the airport for the long
flight back to California. I slept like a puppy.
When I arrived back in Los Angeles, an urgent phone call was waiting
for me. It was from an editor at the LAT: "Tom, this column on
Singapore, are you sure you want it to run?"
I said: "Sure, what's wrong with it?"
"Well, it's, um, how do I put it...it's kind of soft on Singapore."
[no lines skipped here]
"What do you mean?"
"Singapore is a terrible place, Tom!" You're too easy on them."
"Have you ever been there?"
It was allowed that the editor had not ever been.
"I just returned after a week of reporting and I do not think it is a terrible
place at all. I think the column is quite fair. No one followed me aound;
I didn't see any caning; and Lee Kuan Yew is a helluva lot smarter than
Dan Quayle."
"I don't know. There are some mumblings about this column from
Higher Authority."
"Look, Singapore's press, whatever its strengths, is obviously not as free
as a free press in the West. But isn't it one of our press' most revered
calling cards that we're totally open and free, and thus any
well-substantiated point of view can get into print?" [he's smart~]
I was inadvertently asking if we wanted the LAT to be as repressive as
he was accusing the Singapore news media of being.
The ploy worked. The LAT shrank back and the column ran....
...Lee understands world politics to be an interrelated net of
idealogies and practices, some of which corresponds to the American
way while others do not. Lee's own politcal learnings obviously fall
into the later category but I saw no reason to slam him for that, especially
since he used his un-American beliefs to create a safe, prosperous
and peaceful new country.
...
...
...Lee saw me and dramatically pointed in my direction.
"Los Angeles Times!" [LoL~] he said in a stong voice. The reception
room, packed to its edges, quieted a little.
I thought to myself, laughing: "Oh God, he can't remember my name but
he's going to cane me anyhow!" [diaOz~!]
Instead he said: " That column of yours...I well know and appreciate the
ideology of the American media. That column was brave of you."
[no skipped lines here as well]
This was an amazing moment. Sure, Lee would not be the first person to
seek favour with a columnist by flattering him but I do not think that was
his motive. He does not care that much what the Western press thought
about him, unless Singapore's overall image was hurt.
His point was that the American news media had an overarching ideology
that is all but invisible to us, but extremely obvious to those outside our
borders; he also implicitly understood that if the American journalist
deviated from the ideology by too wide a margin, the journalist runs
certain risjs, especially professionally.
I had deviated by not slamming Singapore; I had run some risks; and I
don't think the LAT was ever happy with that column. nor with a lot
of my columns about China...
...You see, in the American media, if you're bashing, you're not a real
macho journalist.
I did say in the column that Lee is indeed "another Asian authoritarian
without remorse...[no lines skipped] whose flinty intolerance of such
things as a vigorous free press seems buffered by (his) donnish accents
of Cambridge". [chucKLe] That was balanced with the assertion that
America "doesn't have to agree with everything (Lee) says. But why not
listen? We could learn something about Singapore (from him) - and
about ourselves, too."
Well, a balance perspective doesn't fly for very long in the American
political press. As a journalist, you're considered bland, a milquestoast,
a pushover. You're written off as a dork by those who long for the
sharp teeth of the ever-hungary, self-appointed watchdog. Lee Kuan
Yew had his faults, as do we all. But even his worst critics acknowledge
that he is a man of superior intellect and extraordinary experience,
and possessed an iron will put to the good use of his country. Yes,
he did things the Singaporean way, and not the American way, but
that's precisely what America needs to understand. It works.
End~
i simpLy juz loVe thiS guY...
seNse oF huMour...
Use oF laNguaGe....
n his sTyLe of wRitiN...
he juz haS thiS knaCk of wriTin...
in a ResPecTfuL maNNer...
n yeT beiNg veRy oFFensive...
in a SuPeR subtle waY...
juZ to creaTe tt baLaNce...
iF u unDerstaNd wad i meaN~
YuP...juZ loVe thiS aRticLe~
P.S. i was thinkin why e journalist was
comparing Mr Lee & Dan Quayle...
n wHo is thiS guy anywaY?!
so i searcheD internet...guess wad...
naT u wiLL loVe e deePeR meaNeR to why
Tom Plate said "Lee Kuan Yew is a helluva lot
smarter than Dan Quayle."
check this webby ouT -->CLicK thiS!
a paRt frM e webby...
iF u r too lazY (LiKe me!)
Throughout his time as Vice President, Quayle was widely ridiculed
in the media and by many in the general public, in both the USA
and overseas, as an intellectual lightweight. For example, Quayle
received the satirical Ig Nobel Prize for "demonstrating, better than
anyone else, the need for science education" in 1991.
SuPeR fuNNy maN!!!
N aLL i WanT iS . . .
0 comments
0 Comments:
Post a Comment