STYLE

3 Oct 1993

STYLE

        This is a reaction to the recent exchange of views between 
David Chan and ST columnists Asad Latif and Han Fook Kwang.
        Although I was troubled by the weakly-supported accusation 
of bigotry fired at A.M. Rosenthal and a tone that verged on the vitriolic 
at times, it was nevertheless a refreshing change to read the spirited 
columns by Latif and Han. I was willing to ignore my reservations for 
the sake of some passion in ST's political columns. Moreover, there 
was the excuse that they were merely replying in kind.
        David Chan wrote a thoughtful and earnest article presenting 
his views on the matter. The response of your columnists was, to put it 
mildly, dismaying. They could have easily confined themselves to a 
reasoned rebuttal of Chan's points. Instead, they chose to adopt an 
arrogant and mocking attitude towards the end. Where was the need to 
cast doubt on Chan's readiness to come to Singapore's "defence?" Or, 
by using the word "solidarity," to suggest that Chan and Rosenthal are, 
somehow, in league? What an unbecoming display of journalistic 
pique! Is it not ironic that the ST, while loudly condemning the wild 
accusations being hurled at China, should simultaneously be engaged in 
a similar practice against a citizen? It seems that the Western media 
does not hold a monopoly on bad journalism after all.
        I recall that Editor Fong, musing on the Economist affair, 
encouraged Singaporeans to present their views in the ST first rather 
than immediately writing to the foreign press. After this extraordinary 
display of a negative attitude towards dissenters by Latif and Han,  he 
should not be too surprised to find that the ST still has a long way to go 
before it gains the trust of dissenters.