The Asian Commercial Sex Scene  

Go Back   The Asian Commercial Sex Scene > For stuff you can't discuss with your Facebook Account > Coffee Shop Talk of a non sexual Nature

Notices

Coffee Shop Talk of a non sexual Nature Visit Sam's Alfresco Heaven. Singapore's best Alfresco Coffee Experience! If you're up to your ears with all this Sex Talk and would like to take a break from it all to discuss other interesting aspects of life in Singapore,  pop over and join in the fun.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 29-03-2015, 02:10 AM
Sammyboy RSS Feed Sammyboy RSS Feed is offline
Sam's RSS Feed Bot - I'm not Human. Don't talk to me.
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 467,335
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
My Reputation: Points: 10000241 / Power: 3357
Sammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond reputeSammyboy RSS Feed has a reputation beyond repute
Thumbs up Alfian sa'at takes issue with a straits times report quoting him out of context

An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:

ALFIAN SA'AT TAKES ISSUE WITH A STRAITS TIMES REPORT QUOTING HIM OUT OF CONTEXT

Post date:
28 Mar 2015 - 10:13am








Local Playwright Alfian Sa'at has taken issue with a recent Straits Times piece which he says has quoted him out of context.

He had earlier posted an interesting satirical piece on Facebook poking fun at the seemingly endless accolades paid to Mr Lee Kuan Yew and his contributions to Singapore.
It was a lengthy status putting out in satire an exaggerated account of some of the things that the media, Lee Kuan Yew supporters and mourners are crediting to Mr Lee.
As with any satire, it needs to be taken in the whole to understand the true weight of the words and pick up on the subtle criticism within a wider, greatly exaggerated piece. Despite this, Straits Times went ahead and extracted a short half paragraph from the piece and credited it to Mr Sa'at.

While they had noted in their report that it was a satire, taking a short extract and reporting with it without the rest of the creative piece invites readers who are not aware of the tone of the whole piece to feel that Mr Sa'at is ungrateful and insulting Mr Lee.

Here is the extract which ST took out: "Did you wake up today? What did you see? A ceiling? Yes, that roof over your head - Lee Kuan Yew put it there. So tomorrow, when you wake up, and look at your ceiling, the very least you can do is imagine his face on it. Looking down on you. Know that he has always looked down on all of us Singaporeans."

Read alone, it is condescending and condemning of Mr Lee. But for those who have read his entire piece, it is clear that his primary focus was not on making fun of Mr Lee but instead of making fun of the endless praises that the public had.

He appeared to be making a point that it is not appropriate to credit everything in Singapore today to the contributions of one man and one man alone. The critique was primarily about the public reaction and not Mr Lee himself.

Most ST readers would not have the benefit of knowing Mr Sa'at's style of writing and many who have not read his original piece, would naturally feel angry at Mr Sa'at's jokes.

He also clarified on his facebook that he was nto approached for interview at all before the publication of the report and he further said that after contacting the writer, she showed a blatant disregard for Mr Sa'at's safety and well being.







Here is Mr Sa'at's full response to the ST article:
The Straits Times has cobbled together an article made up of extracts from my Facebook statuses (one of which they have *helpfully* translated from Malay to English) and also comments that I've made on some threads.

They did not interview me for the story. And according to them it's because they were unable to reach me. And it's true, because these days I don't like answering calls from the Straits Times knowing that some things I say will be taken out of context to fit a certain story angle.

Which is why I have Facebook, where I can be in full control of what I want to express.

But! The Straits Times has obviously found a way around this, because they then wrest that control back from me by taking snippets and then publishing it as an article.
The thing is over the past few days I've noticed the advance of the online pitchfork mob. The first few responses to my satirical pieces seem to get the commentary, but increasingly I've had people visit my page to tell me that I'm 'an asshole' and an 'ingrate' and 'attention-seeker'. Because they were getting pretty vicious I'd decided to make my statuses private for the time being until cooler heads prevail.

But apparently they still show up on some feeds and The Straits Times has decided to give them a public airing in their print edition, much more public than I'd ever anticipated when I first published them on Facebook. I thought this was a bit of a dick move, especially since the Mourning Police was amassing and starting to patrol any form of expression that ran contrary to a funereal script. Laughter was starting to be seen as taboo. As something obscene, even callous. Surely the Straits Times would know that it would upset some of their readers? Especially those who have never followed me on Facebook and who don't realise that I have tried to be consistent with my views.

For the record, I stand my everything that I have written on Facebook. But in their original form, with full context. I'm a little too exhausted to figure out what The Straits Times is actually doing: pissing me off by making a patchwork article out of my online jottings and also potentially pissing their readers off--those who are going to stumble upon something which they'd probably not want to read at this time. As if there isn't already enough of a circus going on, it seems like they want to add in a sideshow.

Anyway, in my conversation with the journalist, I asked her, 'why do you want to publish the article?'

She said, 'because it's newsy'.

I said, 'OK, let's say you have this choice. If you publish it, there's a possibility that my safety might be threatened. Because people are getting irrational and I don't know who might want to harm me. Which is more important to you, news or my personal safety?'

'News,' she said. 'But if you get any death threats you can make a police report and we'll definitely run the story.'

The Straits Times, ladies and gentlemen.

https://www.facebook.com/alfiansaat/...52647899562371



Tags:
Editorials


Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com.
Advert Space Available
Bypass censorship with https://1.1.1.1

Cloudflare 1.1.1.1
Reply



Bookmarks

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +8. The time now is 07:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copywrong © Samuel Leong 2006 ~ 2025 ph