TR EMERITUS

By Jessica Vascellaro from Wall Street Journal, 25 March 2010 BEHIND Google's dramatic decision to close its China-based search engine this week was co-founder Sergey Brin's change of heart about the compromises required to do business in a land that was increasingly reminding him of his native Soviet Union. The beginning of that change came just after the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing, Mr Brin said in an interview about the China decision. As the glow of the Olympics faded, he said, the Chinese government began cranking up its web censorship and interfering more with Google's business. Around that time, he said, the murky rules of doing business in China grew even murkier. "China was ever-present," he said. "One out of five meetings I attended had some component that applied to China in a different way than other countries." Mr Brin said he was also moved by growing evidence in China of repressive behaviour he remembered from the Soviet Union, which he and his parents fled when he was six years old. He said memories of that time - having his home visited by Russian police; the anti-Semitic discrimination against his father - emboldened his view that it was time to abandon Google's policy. China has "made great strides against poverty and whatnot," Mr Brin said. "But nevertheless, in some aspects of their policy, particularly with respect to censorship, with respect to surveillance of dissidents, I see the same earmarks of totalitarianism, and I find that personally quite troubling." On January 12, Google said it would stop self-censoring its search engine in China, citing cyber-attacks it believes were motivated by an attempt to spy on Chinese activists' emails. On Monday, Google implemented that policy, routing mainland users of its search engine to a site in Hong Kong that the company wasn't censoring. The cyber attacks were the "straw that broke the camel's back," Mr Brin said. A heated debate in the company about whether to cease censoring ensued, say people familiar with the matter. Mr Brin and other executives prevailed over chief executive Eric Schmidt and others who felt that Google ought to stay the course in China to continue to push its principles from the inside, say people familiar with the discussions. "We did have a long conversation about it, several long conversations," Mr Brin said. "We heard all the arguments." When asked if Mr Schmidt and co-founder Larry Page were available for comment, a Google spokeswoman said Mr Brin was speaking on behalf of the company. What's next for Google in China is uncertain. Its business is in jeopardy. Some partners - like Hong Kong media company TOM Group - dropped their search agreements with Google, citing the need to abide by Chinese law. Employees are contemplating defecting to rivals like Microsoft, according to recruiters. Beijing has called the move "totally wrong" and internet experts are sceptical that China will let Google continue to route traffic from its China site to Hong Kong. While Google isn't censoring that site, China's routine Internet filters are blocking some results for users in China. Mr Brin's doubts over Google's early agreement to censor in China hark back to his childhood in the Soviet Union, which he and his family left in 1979 to escape anti-Semitism. Mr Brin was six, but he said he is reminded of the constant fear of surveillance through memories such as police visiting his family's apartment to question his parents after they made the decision to emigrate. To this day, Mr Brin said, he and his family often reflect on the significance of the move. His father, he said, wanted to be an astrophysicist, but because of ethnic discrimination became a mathematician. He relished the freedom to pursue "his own entrepreneurial dreams," he said. His father became a professor of mathematics at the University of Maryland. - Wall Street Journal  Read More →

OPINION The Singapore media is never known for fair and balanced coverage on local politics. All the papers in Singapore are owned by Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) whose Chairman is none other than Dr Tony Tan, a former PAP minister. Not surprisingly, its articles are largely pro-PAP with little coverage on the opposition such that it appears to be virtually non-existent though opposition leaders have been working the ground hard in between the elections. Of all the opposition parties in Singapore, the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) has suffered the most under the relentless attack of the mainstream media and its Secretary-General Dr Chee Soon Juan has even been labelled as suffering from a personality disorder by a Senior Correspondent of the Straits Times. One former SPH journalist we spoke to revealed that the atmosphere in SPH is "politically charged". The senior editors are almost always PAP people and they are extremely careful not to publish any articles which may put their political masters in a bad light. As for the opposition, utmost caution has been given not to "promote" them excessively to the detriment of the PAP. For example, Workers' Party Glenda Han used to have a column on a local paper, but was taken out after feedback from the "above". Under such trying circumstances, some opposition leaders avoid the mainstream media like a plague as exemplified by Workers' Party MP Low Thia Kiang. Others like as SDP makes use of the New Media to bypass the mainstream media to get their message across. When Lianhe Zaobao published an article of the SDP's 30th anniversary dinner and an extensive interview with SDP, it is probably the first time in many years that SDP is given a relatively positive coverage in the local press. Unfortunately, it turns out to be another false dawn as SDP took issue with a segment of the interview which appeared to portray Dr Chee as being "evasive" and having something to "hide" regarding his source of income. Dr Chee wrote a letter to the Straits Times Forum accusing the Zaobao journalist who interviewed him. Ms Yew Run Tian for painting him in a bad light: “The way that the report is written is clearly an attempt to portray me as being evasive about my income. I had told the Zaobao reporter, Ms Yew Lun Tian, clearly that I depended on my books and from time to time, help from my relatives for survival. Because she found it hard to believe that this was sufficient, I told her that we lived simply and frugally……Yet Ms Yew reported it in such a way that I was trying to avoid her answer and had something to hide. What is left unsaid, although clearly implied, is that I may be a stooge of a foreign agent conducting activities against Singapore.” (read letter here) Ms Yew subsequently clarified on her Facebook that she wrote the interview as such because Dr Chee really sounded evasive and hesistant when she spoke to him. Naturally, not many accepted Ms Yew's explanation and she received a lot of brickbats from netizens for "sabotaging" Dr Chee yet again. While the reaction from Dr Chee is predictable, the tone of his letter sounded a bit too harsh on Ms Yew who had taken the initiative to moot the idea of interviewing him to her superior. Regardless of Ms Yew's real motives, it may be more tactical and diplomatic simply to state one's own stance without sounding emotional or defensive which may raise more doubts in the minds of some readers. It is difficult but not impossible for the opposition to overcome its inherent inhibition, suspicion and distrust of the mainstream media. Though the New Media is gaining ground among young Singaporeans, it still has a limited reach compared to the mass media in Singapore. It may be prudent and wise to start cultivating ties with some SPH journalists rather than alienating everybody by painting them as PAP stooges in a single stroke which will not serve the opposition cause in anyway. Judging from the articles written by some young journalists like Ms Yew, Ms Rachal Chang, Mr Jeremy Au Yong and Mr Kor Kian Beng, they are by and large quite objective, factual and balanced. Young journalists today are more open, liberal and exposed than their predecessors. Not all of them have been bought over by the PAP. There will and still exist some who are trying to work within the system to bring about change. It is not easy to practise journalism in Singapore. Young journalists are not paid well and have to put up with long working hours, weekend assignments and sometimes even spending the nights in office rushing to complete an article by its stipulated dateline. Furthermore, they have to put up with snide remarks from fellow Singaporeans on being the "mouthpieces" of the PAP as well as demanding and unreasonable superiors who sometimes edit their work beyond recognition just to be politically correct. We should always keep our channels of communications with one another. There are no permanent friends or foes in politics. An enemy in the past may turn out to be a treasured ally in the future. Perhaps it is time for the opposition to put down its historical baggage and enmity with the Singapore media and start their relationship afresh again. We are fighting for the rights of all Singaporeans including journalists, civil servants and PAP supporters. If we do not have a big enough heart to embrace our detractors, critics and enemies, how can we ever hope to achieve bigger things in life later on?   EDITORS’ NOTE: Please join our Facebook discussion on this article here and invite your friends to do so as well to raise awareness among fellow Singaporeans.   Related articles: >> Dr Chee replies to Zaobao journalist's clarification >> Zaobao journalist posts clarification on her Facebook  Read More →

Written by Our Correspondent The Singapore Democratic Party has taken PAP MP Dr Teo Ho Pin to task over his silence on the rental hike by Sheng Siong after it took over 5 wet markets from HDB. SDP had written to Dr Teo last year imploring him to join them to oppose the sale of the Fajar wet market under his constituency of Bukit Panjang to Sheng Siong. Dr Teo did not answer SDP directly, but told the media that "it was he who lobbied HDB to build the wet market in 1996 and he had been meeting the residents, stallholders and grassroots leaders recently to “resolve” the issue." There were no subsequent updates from Dr Teo on what he did exactly to "resolve" the matter which is now hanging in the air as affected stallholders deliberate whether to stay put. SDP's Assistant Secretary-General Mr John Tan had written to Dr Teo imploring him to state his stance clearly: "Remaining silent is not an option. Do you support the raising of the rental? If you don't, will you publicly condemn Sheng Siong's reprehensible move? Are you going to do anything to help resolve the matter?" He revealed that SDP will "do whatever it takes" to get Sheng Siong to reverse its decision without elaborating more on it and invited Dr Teo to join them: "In the coming months and weeks, the SDP will do everything we can can to get Sheng Siong to reverse its decision. We invite you to join us in our effort. What do you say?" It is highly unlikely that SDP will ever get a reply from Dr Teo who won the single seat of Bukit Panjang by a whooping margin of nearly 77 percent in the last general election. Perhaps SDP has misunderstood Dr Teo's intentions. His promise to "resolve" the issue is not to stop Sheng Siong from raising the rental, but to persuade the stallholders to accept the inevitable. The duty of PAP MPs is not to speak up for the people or to fight for their rights, but rather to "explain" the PAP's policies to them, to make them understand and if unnecessary "force" them down their throats. SDP should just leave the hapless Dr Teo alone and show us what it is capable of. As PAP minister Lim Swee Say proclaimed proudly in Parliament not too long ago: "We (PAP) are DEAF to all criticisms."   EDITORS’ NOTE: Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so and help us exceed the number of fans on the official YPAP Facebook page.   Related articles: >> Sheng Siong increased rental by 30 per cent in the 5 wet markets it bought >> SDP calls off planned speech at Fajar after being denied a permit by police >> SDP requests for a meeting with Sheng Siong >> Teo Ho Pin replies to SDP without addressing them >> Teo Ho Pin to SDP: “You didn’t do your homework!” >> SDP stops Sheng Siong from converting wet markets into supermarkets >> SDP writes to Dr Teo Ho Pin to oppose sale of Fajar wet market  Read More →