THE TEMASEK REVIEW

csl:

I do not think people are comfortable with the “mainstream values” that borders on Fundamentalism. MSM like the ST for example like to gloss over details or use misleading headlines but they do not try to propagate Fundamentalism or spread views that are non-secular.

At the end of the day, the various religious groups are welcomed to set up shop and spread their “good word” but not under the guise of a news site.

Hoong Ann Chia:

One of its mission statements:
“To provide accurate, truthful, fair and up-to-date news reports, views and insights on serious topical issues.”

People can write a mission statement.
The fact remains, you have to prove that you walk the talk.
The netizen should scrutinize this website.
I wonder what are the backgrounds of the CEO and all involved and who exactly is funding it.

There is an easy litmus test. When it is open, pose the most serious questions to them and see how they respond or if questions posed are not published or comments deleted.

Any unpublished or deleted comments should be posted to other blogs to inform the people. Just like how unpublished letters to MSM should be published in other blogs.

I think 1 day can prove how real is this site.

They shall be tested. hahaha

Odie:

“In the wake of the announcement of the launch of SINGANEWS, The Temasek Review has over the last weekend, published a slew of articles (no less than 5 – see below) relating to this topic:”

Exactly my thoughts and the comments made
about the “Agenda” and Singanews’ promoting “Mainstream Fa,ily Values” has raised the ire of many here. So if any one can offer their views as to what their exactly are their thoughts on mainstream family values, perhaps the discussions will be more meaningful.

I suggest sinceTemasek Review seems to be publishing so much about Singanews, they should tell us their position on what they think should be acceptable mainstream family values to start the ball rolling. Or should such discussion be considered taboo?

Robox:

Mainstream. That’s the word that Singanews is appropriating to describe itself. Now, isn’t that also the word that extremists who occupy the ultraconservative-to-fascist band on the political spectrum always like to claim they are?

This is actually not inconsistent with an aspect of ultraconservative ideologies (which include conservatism, ultraconservatism, and fascism but not right-of-centre conservatism) where its proponents tend to hold one group up – usually themselves – as the ones whose values the rest of society should aspire to.

By taking a nice-sounding word like “mainstream” for themselves, what they attempt to do in effect is to leave the rest of us with no nice names to call ourselves; mainstream people are well balanced, and even perfectly-centred individuals not given to extremes.

There are three fact-based reasons we should be rejecting Singanews claim of being ‘mainstream’;

1. SPH and Mediacorp, where Singanews is drawing their ‘mainstream’ writers from, only reflect PAP thinking which the PAP has always wanted to be the thinking that would be characterized as the statistical norm in the Singapore population. That way, the PAP can then go on to claim that the statistical norm is also the “mainstream” view, which oh, just so happens to coincide with their political ideology. The people who are starting up Singanews have all of that same sense of arrogance about their moral superiority, “moral superiority” being the true subtext of the word “mainstream”.

2. The PAP does in fact subscribe to a political ideology despite pious protestations to the contrary. That ideology is anywhere between ultraconservatism-to-fascism exactly like the Thio Li-ann-type Christians – this is a strictly academic view.

3. However, ultraconservatism-to-fascism can by no stretch of the imagination be considered to be political *centrism*, which is the word we should actually be using instead of ‘mainstream’ in politics and political and socio-political news and commentary; centrism is *the* word that professional journalists use.

(One way to know if you are politically a centrist is to ask yourself if you are appealed to the practises of constitutionalism, the rule of law, and rationality in legislation and its enforcement. Does any of the above describe the PAP and its scions?)

We would all do ourselves and Singapore a favour by refusing to refer to the SPH and Mediacorp stables as the mainstream media (MSM). I’m going to start by referring to them as the UCM (or ultraconservative media when they are ultraconservative) or FM (or fascist media when they are being fascist); I hope others will join me.

We should not even be feeling bullied that we are ‘less than moral’ for not espousing any of the views by the ‘mainstream’ Singanews – the contempt that ‘mainstream’ people have for those not like them, and the punitive ill treatment that awaits their victims *cannot* be called moral.

I’m proud that I’m a political liberal.