TR EMERITUS

This is written by Darkness of the brotherhood, guest columnist: I have a full round of conference calls today – so this has to be a lightning post – lets dive in; tell me pronto – do you get the feeling that something is amiss – do you for example flip open the ST only to wonder why there’s no news in the newspapers? Or have you ever sat through a news report only to wonder, why only side A is forwarded and what happened to the side B account? Wonder no more – welcome to the national game of hide and seek; where the elusive truth is very much like the Cheshire cat; its got a winning smile, but its pastry light when it comes to the filling. Granted what I am describing is certainly opaque and at best vague; that’s only because these days (real or imagined) I just can’t seem to pin down the feeling something is amiss – you could just as well take your pick; everything from how Temasek and GIC lost so much money; to perhaps the issue of why some town councils staff are getting paid exorbitant bonuses and everything in between – its really a litany that hardly requires any elaboration. Straits Times and CNA DELETED online articles on CDC bonus fiasco If you want to really understand why the press seems to be so evasive these days and all the seem to do is give most of all the mushroom treatment – keep you in the dark and feed you shit – that may have something remotely to do with the whole idea of damage control i.e mythologizing and legitimizing; the whole idea of the status quo ante –  that could explain why one of the preferred strategies that’s usually adopted by those in power is to say nothing or provide only scraps of information in the hope that everything will just blow over and hopefully disappear into the garbage heap of history. But what’s the real cost of silence? Before we dive into the actual cost, it may be a good idea to find out why people do the things they do: selective reportage, silence along with adopting a little goes a very long way strategy just happens to be one of the most effective tools at damage control – for one it takes its cue from clinical psychology – deny the existence of a disease and viola all the symptoms melt happily away and all societal ills melts away happily like lemon drops. Besides it seldom pays to be too forthright by volunteering information, leaders who are too quick to provide a public explanation for a debacle are especially vulnerable. For one there’s simply too much at stake; reputation the whole idea of up keeping the myth of infallibility along with the necessary lie that every regime needs to forward as a raison to secure its hold on power – in short, it doesn’t pay to admit ones mistakes. What most people don’t realize is there actually a science to denial; I am serious and it goes something like this - leaders will only publicly offer an explanation if and when they calculate the cost of doing so to be lower than the cost of not doing so. But how reliable is this strategy of keeping silent, sweeping everything underneath the carpet and forwarding only a cut down version of the truth? Well, first of all let’s gut out a few myths: silence is not golden; in fact, it full of shit. My point is this; an information black out or white wash in any guise these days; just doesn’t cut it, not in the pineapple eyed age of the internet – where the truth can always be ferreted out and brought to light - it doesn’t matter whether it’s a financial debacle, investment fiasco or even exorbitant pay outs in the form of bonuses to town council staff – in the long run; all it does is corrode the trust and good will between those in power and those who and only. It makes far more strategic sense to provide a clear and unambiguous account when something goes wrong then to try to elide it with wafer thin sound bites.   If you don’t believe me consider the case of Exxon (which incidentally had no choice but to change their name to Exxon-Mobil to regain consumer trust), which was notoriously inept in providing an explanation for the disastrous oil spill along the coast of Alaska in 1989. What was the initial response to the crisis? Silence cum less-is-more (does it sound familiar?). The CEO Lawrence Rawl whose picture incidentally I still pin to my dart board to commemorate the murder of all the penguins and polar bears waited 6 days to speak to the press. By then all the damage had been done. By the time Exxon wised up, their statements were considered too weak, ineffectual and a reflection of their ineptitude. Result: Customers boycotted Exxon and refused to buy their products and they suffered losses that tabled somewhere in the upper reaches of billions in lost revenues! Exxon’s refusal to acknowledge its role left an indelible stain on its reputation as a responsible and trusted technology provider to this day. What this case study illustrates is constricting the flow of information is simply trouble in the long run. Denying its existence is even worse. And continuing as if nothing has happened - just cuts off any opportunity for closure and the prospects of moving forward. Another reason why I don’t like silence is it doesn’t solve as much as create more problems – for example marginalize a community in the internet and what do you actually get? Do they keel over a die; or maybe they just dig their heels deeper very much like the Londoners did when Hitler once tried to bomb Londoners into submission; my point is it doesn’t pay to constrict the free flow of information by attempting to bracket the social discourse; all it that does is create missing blanks and hot spots in the narrative – and who do you think steps in to fill up those spaces? Usually all that does is create ideal conditions for hucksters, charlatans and those bent on a spot of mayhem to step in and fill in the missing links in the fill-in-the-blanks narrative with their self serving version of the “truth.” That incidentally is how radicalism, fundamentalism and conspiracy theories typically take root. Where disclosure is only partial and lacking in substantive detail it allows opportunities for undesirable elements to confect their own version of what-happened and who-dunnit versions to fester. The same cannot be said where institutions and bureaucracies choose to address the demand for an explanation, “head on” by providing a comprehensive account that attempts to ameliorate the situation by saying,       “Yes, these are valid concerns and we must really try to address them the best we can.” In this sort of open setting, schools of thoughts and states of minds are presented winnowed, challenged and tested to continually reject lies leaving only the truth. That restores trust in both the people and institution. Ameliorating the situation by being open and frank may still be fraught with risk but at least it respects the ideal. The compact between people and state run institutions is worth nourishing, nurturing and preserving. You don’t have to be a genius to figure out; the only reason, why silence continues to have any currency resembling a social or intrinsic value is someone, somewhere at sometime expects to hear your side of the story. But what if they no longer care to even listen? What if they don’t even feel the need to understand? Or don’t even feel the need to close the gap? Can we then say if that terminal stage is reached – silence has lost all its value that it simply means leaders and people will eventually find themselves standing so far apart from each other, they might as well be two ships passing each other in the darkened night – that’s just trouble, big trouble. Darkness 2009 The Brotherhood Press  Read More →

Malaysiakini: With two weeks to go, how’s your campaign for Umno deputy president going?: Normally you would have one or two months (of campaigning) before the general assembly but this time it’s six months, so it’s a long haul. Consequently, it’s very tedious in terms of the time you have to spend to meet with the delegates and all the division heads. Muhyiddin But I’m keeping my fingers crossed. I’m meeting many people, and of course, at the same time take the opportunity to explain current issues. While the party election process is important, the bigger issue is of course the interests of the nation, which I think are more important. When they start to evaluate (Umno) leadership, this should be the basis of how they should vote. How are you different from the other two candidates - Mohd Ali Rustam and Muhammad Muhd Taib?                      I am one of the more senior members of the party. I explain to them (the delegates) my track record in terms of service to the government in various ministries, (and) the positions that I have taken since I became member of Umno supreme council and as vice-president. I have been highlighting the experience I have gone through in managing the government and the party, so I am trying to impress upon the delegates that this should be the criteria in choosing a leader. I think my experience, both at local and international level, would be very useful (insofar) as putting someone as No. 2 in the party as well as in the government. These are the ingredients that you need. Well, I have to sell myself as a product. I think I have good qualities. But of course, while that is so, it’s not just about saying what you are, who you are and what you have been doing all this while... They also want you to be closer to them, shake more hands, look at them in the eye, pat their backs more often... Apart from seniority and experience, what else would you tell the delegates about being fit for the No. 2 post? I think they should look at my track record. I do not mince my words. I speak with clarity, my intentions for certain things, like what I did for the power transition plan. But more than that, I impress upon them (the delegates), even to create a feeling of fear that Umno cannot to continue to slide. We’ve realised in the post-mortem how Umno fared in the last elections, where we stand vis-a-vis the people’s support and not just the Malays but non-Malays as well. I explained to them the role Umno had played before as the premier party in BN and what is happening today. I explained to them the wider picture on why is there a need to reform and bring back (the core principles). We need action and I am a man of action. I mean things and I do it, and we need to be fast. I instilled in them the urgency (that) this (reform) needs to be done now. In fact, we have not done so, even after the elections, so now you need some sort of leadership (that can bring in reforms) and I believe I can offer these (qualities). These are the things they have to think about carefully - it’s not just merely an Umno issue, it is also in the interest of the Malaysian people. Never in the history of the party elections have the people at large, both non-Malays and Malays, (taken) so much interest in Umno - like who is going to be the president or the deputy because they are going to be the leaders of the country. People want to know how the leadership will handle the economy (and) politics, and whether or not they have trust in the person who will hold such positions. I told them, with all the surveys that I have done, Muhyiddin is the person who can help. You can’t say I have to be very modest about it, and this is true. I have been getting a lot of support from people outside who care about the state of things and they tell me that I must be there to help the leadership. Read full interview on Malaysiakini  Read More →

Umno deputy president aspirant Mohd Ali Rustam has been barred from contesting in the upcoming party polls. The decision was revealed by the party's disciplinary committee chairperson Tengku Ahmad Rithauddeen Tengku Ismail at a special press conference at the Umno headquarters in Kuala Lumpur. Ahmad Rithauddeen said Mohd Ali was disqualified from running for the post after three of his aides were found guilty of vote-buying. "It is presumption of guilt, as the principle is that he is liable for the wrongdoing of his agents," the disciplinary head told a press conference. [See chart below] The committee also issued a stern warning to Khairy Jamaluddin, who is standing for Umno Youth chief. It, however, cleared another candidate, former Selangor menteri besar Dr Mohd Khir Toyo, of any wrongdoing. In view of Mohd Ali being barred, the contest for the No. 2 slot will see a straight fight between favourite International Trade and Industry Minister Muhyiddin Yassin and Rural Development Minister Muhammad Muhd Taib.  According to Ahmad Rithauddeen, action was taken against Mohd Ali after he was found liable for the acts of his agent. He said that Mohd Ali's political secretary Saadun Basirun was found guilty of being involved in money politics to buy votes. No other details were revealed and Saadun was suspended from the party for three years. As for Khairy, he was also found liable for his agent's misbehaviour. However since his agent's offence was lesser in gravity than Saadun, Khairy was let off with just a warning. Khir meanwhile was investigated for alleged money politics but he was cleared on any wrongdoing by the committee, said Ahmad Rithauddeen.  Read full article on Malaysiakini EDITORS' NOTE: Khairy should start planning for life after retirement from politics. The knives are out for him. Will the disciplinary committed dare to haul him up if his father-in-law is still firmly in control of the party? He will probably lose the elections for the UMNO Youth post and the death knell will finally sound for him when Najib take over.  Read More →