TELEGRAPH TURNS CURRY PROTEST INTO WAR

I was horrified when I logged on to Facebook this morning and read that Telegraph (UK) had run a story on the Cook a Pot of Curry event with the following headline, "Singapore’s anti-Chinese curry war”.

Besides the misleading headline, the article made several factual errors. 

First, Singapore’s national language is Malay, not English as stated in the report. Secondly, the Community Mediation Centre in Singapore does not make rulings or pass judgements as described by the reporter. It is the courts that pass judgements and make rulings, not mediation centres. I am surprised that a professional journalist made such a mistake.

It was also reported that a million mainland Chinese arrived in Singapore in recent years, making up a fifth of its current population. I am surprised to see these figures and do not know of any government departments in Singapore that would release them. What does “over recent years” mean? Does it imply two, three or five years? How did the reporter arrive at a concrete figure without a concrete time frame? Why is the source of the data not stated?

What disturbed me most was how the reporter described the Cook a Pot of Curry event as “Singapore’s anti-Chinese war”. This sensational headline totally misrepresented the organisers’ intentions, which were clearly stated in the event's Facebook page and I quote:

“Let us spread the message of love, tolerance, understanding and acceptance. Get the newly arrived citizens to appreciate curry and also appreciate the culture of various ethnic groups here.”

I am very disappointed that a professional journalist would turn a peaceful show of “national pride” into an “anti-Chinese war” story by simply backing it up with one negative quote from thousands of other positive comments made by Singaporeans online. Just to set things right, the event was not targeted at Chinese migrants from China. The riot in UK turned violent recently. I seriously doubt 40,000 people cooking curry at their own homes in Singapore would turn into a war.

I can't help but wonder if the reporter had contacted any of the affected parties, such as the organisers of the Cook a Pot of Curry event, in writing his story? Or did he conveniently rewrite materials he had gathered from other newspaper reports and padded them with one comment lifted from Facebook?

According to Stuart Allan, citizen journalists are often criticised for their lack of objectivity, professionalism and independence. It seems professional journalists are not doing a great job in meeting these criteria either. Thankfully, some Singaporeans subsequently posted comments on the Telegraph article to correct the factual errors and misinterpretations! I have yet to see any corrections made by The Telegraph.

Has citizen journalism proven to be more effective than traditional journalism once again?