Temasek Review exceeds online traffic of SPH’s New Paper and TODAY
Dear readers,
According to latest data from web traffic company alexa.com, Temasek Review has already exceeded the online traffic of SPH’s New Paper and TODAY during the last two weeks though our official traffic ranking is still behind theirs due to a technical delay for it to decrease.
This is the first time that a non-SPH run online news site has exceeded SPH-controlled publications in terms of readership and we would like to express our heartfelt gratitude and appreciation for your support in the last two years.
Since we have achieved the first objective in our roadmap, we will be following up in the next phase which is to incorporate a company to own, run and manage the site (and other sites) proper.
As we become more professional, a shift in our editorial policy and content is warranted.
For a long time, the conventional wisdom among journalists and bloggers is that “objective” sites are more “credible” than “critical” sites and will thereby attract more readers.
From past experience, however, as our readership grows, we realize that for some inexplicable reasons, articles “bashing” the government tends to attract more hits than neutral, fair and balanced articles especially if they are not on politics, like economics.
We have many good writers on economics and business matters, but we can’t afford to pay them to write when their articles don’t sell.
While we understand and appreciate that the fact that some readers have grown to regard our site as a channel for them to vent their grouses, frustrations and anger against the government, it was never our intention for this site to become an “anti-government” or “opposition” news site.
Our vision is for this site to become a credible alternative to the mainstream media and not only that, to be a meeting place for the best talents in the world – from thinkers, visionaries, intellectuals, academics and professionals.
We want Temasek Review to be a really cool, slick and professional site to promote the critical thinking and analysis which is sole lacking in our students today.
We are stuck in a Catch-22 situation here. In order for us to achieve our long-term objectives, we need to move towards the center, reduce and eliminate the strident political rhetoric and to become more fair, balanced and objective in our reports and editorials.
Unfortunately, by doing so, we may lose a significant proportion of our readership which will undo what we have achieved so far.
Though our readership has increased by leaps and bounds in the last few months and have overtaken The New Paper, we are still far away from the big players like Straits Times and Channel News Asia.
To make our site more attractive than theirs, we must continue to produce articles which are more thought-provoking, insightful and enlightening instead of simply leveraging on the general unhappiness on the ground to criticize the government.
In the weeks ahead, we will gradually reduce the number of articles on politics and shift the emphasis to social and economic issues. We sincerely urge our readers to lend their support to our initiative by clicking on these articles and read them though they may not suit your interest or taste.
ADMINISTRATOR
Loading ...
woody on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 8:25 am
Well done TR. Please do not rest on your laurels, continue to provide quality article for the readers. Higher hit rates equates to the ability to inform more readers of news either censored or deliberately go unreported.
Keep it up!
Grim Reaver on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 9:03 am
Excellent work TR. keep it up.
yes, good to also include general news. Esp for people like myself who almost completely shun the msm.
But do continue your politicaly articles. Singaporeans need it.
Anonymous on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 9:10 am
TR, you can write whatever your editorial agenda prefers – be it social-economic issues or politics and economics. You will attract different crowds with each preference BUT YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE ( except by censorship ) to re-align the critical thoughts and comments of your readership. People who views the decisions in politics, economics or social issues in Government as inadequate will continue to express those strident views.
So it is not a matter of “bashing” the Government – the “bashing” exist only in the minds of those who perceives the strident views expressed in blogs as “bashing” but in the minds and action of the bloggers, the strident views expressed are their contentious views – nothing more and nothing less.
You see that in many foreign press – be it Britain, Australia or Canada, the media is anything but subservient or blindly complying – they attack all parties (both in Government and opposition) BUT SOCIETY THERE NEVER VIEWS THEM AS BASHING OF GOVERNMENT OR THE OPPOSITION. THEY ARE JUST VIEWS EXPRESSED whether agreeable or disagreeable to the reader.
I would believe that TR would do better not by re-aligning its editorial preference for socio-economic matter at a reduced interest in politics and economic. They are deeply interwined and mutually embeded. I believe, you can increase your readership by keeping present format BUT INCREASING THE RANGE OF CONTENT to business and economic – not necessarily of your own writings of your “expensive” journalists but a forum for your readers to dissect, agree or disagree of what others wrote. Most major MSM in other jurisdiction writes on economic-business matters – PARTICULARLY INVESTMENTS ( both local and foreign) but does not provide for readers’ alternative viewpoints to express. This, I believe, it a VOID in the market-place which TR can exploit to his advantage.
But I leave it up to TR what is best for its business focus.
Good luck and wishing you success.
Jeremy A Y on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 10:21 am
Congrats to TR. But hope you advance the rankings faster.
The higher your ranking the better for the people.
OnlineShmonline on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 11:03 am
Dear sir,
I’m happy to hear of the online lead taken by a non-SPH promoted site. I understand that you want to take the road to objective journalism. This is to be respected. You have correctly indicated that this may result in a loss of online readership who have seen TR as a non-MSM venue for news and grousing.
While I hope you will be able to shift towards a platform where the incumbent (who have exclusive control over print media and the ‘main’ online channels) and the opposition will be reported about as is, I also hope that you will create a virtual wall where the average Tan, Deen and Hari can express their uncensored (but not vulgar) thoughts on issues affecting their lives today. I believe many see your site as the latter anyways, as there are few ’safe’ avenues of sharing one’s opinion in Singapore.
When so many services and agencies are inextricably tied to the ruling party’s agenda, any vocal dissent is usually taken the wrong way, even if there is a mature way of accepting valid critique. The TR serves as a platform that has done its time and shown itself to be a robust, reflective wall of public sentiment. Please continue to be so in your path to objective and fair reporting.
Good luck, sir.
csl on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 11:06 am
Anonymous, I think you have a point but I agree with the Admins move more.
By moving to the center, does not really mean that TR will “clean up” instead I think the reduction in scathing criticism and the putting down of the MSMs will go a long way in improving the image of TR.
If we allow TR to veer too far down the (left or right) TR will teeter on the edge of becoming another Wayangparty, TOC or burningrepublic. More often than not their articles give me the impression that they are places where hot air is vented. Too often than not they have too much sarcasm and provide very little than what they term as “enlightening”. Things like working with the junta in Myanmmar (and that proves what? CIA trained Afghan fighters who turned into the taliban or Al-Qaeda. They tried to instigate things in other countries as well. Yet the same people idolize the US like its the holiest of holies without understanding that almost any country will do what is in its interest.)
Here the criticism found can be scathing but also very constructive. The suggestions put forward are also rational and not just plain “we need to kick them out”. Articles are firmly grounded on the fact that we need reform and that the opposition is not in the “government in waiting”. Sure our old friends in white are not doing too well but I have yet to see evidence of the opposition coming out and telling us the voters, that they are ready as well.
Peter Su on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 11:07 am
Good for you. Keep up the good works.
et2cetera on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 11:24 am
Congratulations are in order, TR! I hope that this site will have many more happy returns!
Do expand your range of topics discussed rather than curtailing them, if your goal is to be a universal site. Moreover, one suspects that many people gravitate here due to the perception that it is not censored in any form, unlike the SPH-related sites (which invariably carries the connotation of goverment and “acceptability”). To presume what others should know, patronises and insults the intelligence of the readers.
A site that you could look into is http://www.atimes.com, which carries articles from different perspectives on socio-political-economic issues. Such issues are difficult to stay neutral. If it was, it would be akin to discussing the weather. Therefore, debate and friction are inevitable and TR can help to facilitate this. By bringing together views, even diametrically opposing ones, TR can help bring facts and perspectives to the fore. This will allow users to use their own judgement and intelligence to make up their minds. That would be TR’s greatest service.
XiSd Tay on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 11:44 am
I agree with Anonymous when she said: – not necessarily of your own writings of your “expensive” journalists but a forum for your readers to dissect, agree or disagree of what others wrote.
TR should remain Status Quo and not try to bend towards anything, just write and publish articles as you normally would BUT allow readers to publish theirs too.
The present system DOES NOT allow readers to post their articles without emailing the admin.
I would suggest that TR also setup a register to post forum to complement the site. Readers can then post in the forum and I am sure that would whack up traffic by a mile. Maybe use wayangparty.com for the forum instead?
Readers will be given the chance to voice their views on matters affecting them but which TR and others are unaware of.
Good articles can then be consolidated into the main site, ie: This blog.
My 2 cents.
Dhake on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 11:45 am
Congratulations!
While you are re-strategising, do also consider moving away from the rhetoric of the PAP. This will increase your credibility and trustworthiness. As you stand now, you are no different from the PAP if you continue to use their language and rhetoric. This only reinforce how you inherently believe their propaganda. Step out of the thought boundaries they have imposed for you.
Darkness on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 11:55 am
“According to latest data from web traffic company alexa.com, Temasek Review has already exceeded the online traffic of SPH’s New Paper and TODAY during the last two weeks though our official traffic ranking is still behind theirs due to a technical delay for it to decrease.”
Dont get me wrong. I dont wish to throw cold water on your party.
Bear in mind we were once allied as channel partners to this site.
But to me, this isnt a good development. You see I am not a big fan of concerntrating power in just a few sites.
The dangers of centralization hardly requires any elaboration – what happens when you get only one chicken rice vendor in a foodcourt? – Just look at the ST. Why is it ranked below the Timbuktu Daily Post? Is it because it happens to be a creature of the power of one and not the multitudes?
Another reason why I am totally against the whole idea of centralization is if I happen to be the goverment. And I wanted to control the internet. I cant think of a better way to monopolize the thinking economy than to start something very similar if not exactly like wayang.
That is why this site will ONLY be one of many sites that I shall read.
It never pays to put your eggs into one basket.
I am sorry, I am just very honest abt it.
Darkness 2009
admin on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 12:20 pm
Hi Darkness,
Thanks for your frank views, but how do you expect smaller sites to compete with ST when the playing field isn’t level in the first place.
What we are doing now is actually helping to pull the other sites up so that we can have more Temasek Reviews around.
Readership is influence, power and money. Without readership, no matter how good or fantastic your articles are, few will be aware of your presence.
It was never our intention to take over sites and dictate their content or dominate the socio-political sphere.
We believe in a market place of ideas and allow the best to bloom and flourish.
There are some sites with good writers who need some support without which they will be unable to sustain themselves.
All the crap on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 12:27 pm
Congrats to TR.
Please keep up the good work.
It’s like breathing fresh air whenever I read through the
articles and all the posts related to them.Iam sure the traffic will leap by a ‘quantum’ henceforth, whilst the
MSM is losing its creditability & substance.
A remarkable job well done!!
Citiizen on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 12:56 pm
Congrats!Lets put an end to half-truths, lies and attempts to blind the citizen.
A Tan on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 1:25 pm
Wow
Gd stuff.
I think it is not question of cutting back political stuff. I think the issue is getting rid of the political stuff that is polemic rather than analytical. Keep the latter, get rid of the wind.
Let me once again... provide another REFRESHING and unCommon angle here. on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 1:35 pm
We MUST learn to THINK-OUT-OF-THE-BOX…MORE ANd MORE… So as TO BEAT that old-horse and slowing down BUT “Recalcitrant” one.. TO SHOW him… THAT WE CAN… DO It BETTER… THAN HIM… FOR…
Who Says that only he ‘has it”… BUt of course… only himself YAH!!!… So like…
1. On Fri Oct 9 2009, inTODAY newspaper… there was a Tabitha Wang article on “Expats life is hardly a hardship”. It was about expatriates IN Singapore…
2. TODAY Mon Oct 12 2009 saw 3 replies from expatrates. I pick 2 for illustration…
2.1 Jeffrey started with… “I READ Tanitha Wang’s “Expat life is hardly a hardship” (Oct 9) with some disdain. I guess it was written KNOWING THAT It Might STIR Up a Storm.”
NOTE: The Caps are mine to highlight how this writer SEES the TWO sides of a coin!!!… Now let’s see how the other writer start off…
2.2 I REFER to “Expat life is hardly a hardship” (Oct 9). It saddens me that Tabitha Wang thinks all expats live this way.”
NOTE: See HOW Negative and Narrow this writer view is. Isn’t he ONLy seeing Tabitha’s from only what he/she READ. He/she DIN’T ASK/DELVE INTO Tabitha Wang’s INTENTIONS!!!… WHY???… Like most Singaporeans at-large…
Do you now see… HOW… we Singaporeans ARE SinkgaPOOReans in thought and ARE MOSTLY… advantage for LKY to manipulate our minds!!!…
Because… some who ‘LOOK’ tough… ARE actually So… DUE TO… THE WEAKNESS OF those around them!!!… And ARE such ‘leaders’ in a sense ’smART’ self-centred and ‘bullies’ too in kind FOR self interests???… And ISN”T THIS TRUTH… as clear as the Sun’s… Rising and Setting???…
Well… now I hope some of you have It… and more from now on!!! Thank you for reading this far.
Realist on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 1:50 pm
@ Anonymous on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 9:10 am
Much as I agree generally with what you said, I think perhaps you should be mindful of the limitations TR faces ie lack of financial resources to pay for expenses incurred to do research, fact find, polls etc
TR is still on the learning curve and has, in my opinion, done a good job thus far.
I am encouraged by some quality responses esp. in the threads about the recent publication of the book Men In White by ex SPH staff, against obvious pappies and wish more such people could give their views which would educate brainwashed singaporeans too used to the staple of propaganda in the msm.
Good work, TR, and I hope people could contribute FINANCIALLY for TR to achieve better quality.
btan on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 1:53 pm
Hi TR,
Firstly, congratulations to your rising readership.
Secondly, regarding your dilemma about whether your site wants to be objective yet without losing readership.
Let’s talk pure business. Pure business dictates that in order for you to be profitable, you have to cater to your readers. And since you have a good idea what your readers wants, then cater to them what they want.
Readers are essentially your “customers” and if they want a certain product or services, then you should continue to provide for them.
In this case, this product or services your readers want is a voice that is not government mouth piece. More importantly, they want to know things not reported in main stream media. They are :
1.) Negative news about government and the mistakes they made
2.) Positive news about opposition and the achievements they did
These are “products” that are not available anywhere, include in “objective” news sites.
When people keep reading about positive news of the government and negative news about the opposition, they don’t need it from any other “objective” sites. They got them aplenty in the mainstream sites.
Because they are so starved of these news, the moment a site provide them, they gobble up ravenously due to years of starvation.
So, listen to your customers and provide what they like.
The day will come when news sites do not have to partisan and all will be objective and judged by its merits.
Now is not this day.
In the meantime, you need to grow even more bigger. Your baptism of fire has not come yet. Once you become a threat to the ruling government’s hegemony and monopoly on information, they will step in and do something. Already, the first salvo have been fired by them for saying alternative news are not credible.
Notice your treatment will be not so much different from those faced by credible opposition members.
This is why you need to guard yourselves. If you have Singaporean staff, they may eventually faced harassment. If you have foreign staff, the government can say you are foreign entity interfering in local politics.
The road to a free and fair mass media will be long and hard but eventually, I am sure we will all prevail.
cy on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 2:09 pm
i don’t think there is any truly objective media in the world, past,present and future. if not,why are politicians around the world meddling with the media.
to survive,the media has to know its customers’taste in this narrow-casting world.
Darkness on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 2:18 pm
“There are some sites with good writers who need some support without which they will be unable to sustain themselves.”
You’re missing my point – my point is they are doing very well; only they are now talking to their respective audiences in private rooms. Instead of talking to a wider audience.
That is the problem. Everyday the number of private forums are growing. I know, I get to see the data first hand.
But the problem is the cummulative voices are getting fainter and fainter in broader blogosphere.
If this trend continues. There will be no more blogosphere. All we will end up with is an online version of two or maybe three ST’s. As for the real discourses; they will all go underground.
I am serious. And thats the beginning of the mother of all problems.
Darkness 2009
admin on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 2:39 pm
To:
cy: Haven’t we been catering to your tastes all along? An online media which doesn’t even know its readers’ tastes is doomed to fail. SPH is able to survive for so long only because of its monopoly and government support.
btan: The problem is: we do not know if we are attracting the mainstream audience or simply a subgroup of angry and disgruntled readers with an axe to grind with the government. If it is the latter group, then the MIWs better worry!
IsdTay: It’s too difficult to start a new forum from scratch. We rather spend to buy one with an established readership.
Darkness: Talking about private forums, do inform us if there are any owners who are keen to sell theirs to make a quick buck.
Jaz Lim on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 3:17 pm
Yes, keep it up. I have given up reading the STATES TIMES Long time ago. This is more in line with the ordinary citizens’ perception and views. They have lost touch with us citizens. Let us show them what “power” is at the next election.
Anonymous on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 3:27 pm
It is pleasing to hear that there is agreeing and disagreeing views of my thoughts at Anonymous on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 9:10 am. and admin expressed their views as well.
I don’t profess to encourage one way or another. BUT I AM HAPPY THAT TEMASEK REVIEW HAS MADE ELEPHANTS DANCE. Whatever TR chooses, I do wish a lively blog with ROBUST debates in anonymity, the end result is greater success for this blog and in so doing, MSM elephant might slip further and broken one leg to get up and go again. There need to be a vibrant alternative forum.
Admin is right that they could not take on MSM head-on given resources constraints BUT NEITHER SHOULD THEY BE A MIRROR COPY OF THE SAME PRODUCT i would think.
In business, you either follow the leader ( like Ford with GM) or you CHANGED THE RULE OF THE GAME ( like foreign car exporters into US automotive market or in another sense the Lenovo taking in IBM when it started out.
I believe TR took the second option, consciously or unconsciously – IT CHANGED THE RULE OF THE GAME looking for different customers’ appeal and is making elephant dancing to its music for all to see. Opening up contents to wider coverage DOES NOT NECESSARILY ADDING JOURNALISM COSTS – simply by adding a page forum for investment. One must know that SGX is a very top site for Singaporeans – all information but no forum discussion. Why not have discussion but no information since SGX already provided for those. If the investment forum is wider to regional market and different industries, professionals might join in and pull different kind of audience to this site beyond the bread-and-butter-stuff TR is successfully engaging of clientele readership support till now.
All said, it is admin prerogatives and strategic choice.
Wish you folks every success from this take-off point.
silenceisgolden on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 3:43 pm
Dear TR,
Congrats, a job well done.
Just an analogy…
If your shop best sellers are fish and egg, knowing why or not knowing why you still sell fish and egg. Try removing fish and egg completely from your shelves just because others are thriving selling beef and poultry will result either you get no customer or a different type of customers. By trying to convert those who buy fish and egg to buy your beef and poultry offer, you probably will come to a head.
Whether it is fish, egg, beef or poultry they all have their own consumers. If your store is big enough to sell all four, you probably can go ahead.
The only worry I have for the fish and egg buyers is that once beef and poultry buyers ousted them and their favorite items are moved to the back gondola, they will cry foul that you have betrayed them.
Just my 2 cents.
randomnessinmind on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 4:47 pm
@admin:
I’m reading all the comments here, and have came to a little conclusion.
I’m fine with consolidating power, actually, probably because if it’s for business use, yes you’re usually better off with concentrated power. Grants you more incentives, easier ways to route competition, and perhaps your hidden agendas, if any.
So now we need to address this problem of losing our voice and style to accommodate more types of readers. Yes, our voices will die out if too many stuffs get jumbled together. I myself, is actually losing interest slowly, constantly seeing news about Ris Low, and a bunch of other stuffs I see on TV and the Whatnot Times. It’s not a happy thought.
So here I am, on my work desk, thinking, how about you guys, consolidate power, and readers of the same style, along the way? Not a forum, nonono that won’t work. A public forum invites not discussion, if I may, I believe I patronize forums as a source of random information, and refrain from contributing because usually, it generates nothing of interest, mostly stupidity, and is a hassle to read.
Distribute yourself nicely. Political Stuffs, armchair critics and their bunch of readers can fit nicely in one spot, and the ones that comes for entertainment news, another. Have a nice comfortable layout where I know what I want to read at the same AREA.
Your Far Eastern Review is sort of, failing, not because it’s contents aren’t interesting, but it’s actually a hassle for me to visit it everyday for news when I have many other alternatives. I spend more time on a few sites reading their articles and comments, including here, than a few others that generates little interest.
I would suggest you gather materials and writers from the blogosphere, sort them out and place them nicely in their respective places, then let nature takes it course. When you jumble people of common interest together, it generates proper, good, interesting and amusing discussions. Let the ones who’re interested in businesses gather in another area, and the ones who actually benefits most, would be the readers.
I can continue to enjoy the comments that comes, and if I feel like it hop over to another section to absorb some entertainment news and gossips. Or Vice versa, for people who came for the gossips, to take a look at the headlines of politics.
You really don’t have to end up like a newspaper.
btan on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 4:51 pm
Hi TR,
“silenceisgolden” makes a very apt analogy. Your worry is you wonder what kind of audience you are attracting. A more pertinent question is : is your readership growing.
If your readership is growing, then what is the worry? You can doing the right thing (although from a business perspective, you should know why it is growing)
If your readership stagnant or tapering off, then you are right to worry and need to starts getting more readership.
Using “silenceisgolden”’s analogy, you may sell only fish and egg now but eventually, you may want to sell beef and poultry to capture your market share as well.
So currently, the range of topic breakdown is as follows.
1.) Criticism and negative news of government policy (you have these)
2.) Positive news and exposure to opposition (you need to expand to have these to capture more readers)
3.) Positive news and exposure of government and PAP (MSMs have these galore, you have to compete with them on this)
4.) Criticism and negative news of opposition (sometimes you have these and MSMs is expert at this)
5.) Technical topics e.g. economic articles (you will have to compete with not just MSMs but many credible and established news sites dedicated to those)
6.) Lifestyle news (Lots of competition)
7.) Gossips (you should not go there although it is another crowd puller. Again lots of competition)
I guessed you better have an internal meeting among the top executives and decide which direction to go.
Speaking for myself, the reason I come here is because I get to read things I don’t get to read anywhere (i.e. item 1), able to make comments in anonymity and share sentiments with fellow “grousers”. And so far this site has been pretty lively but without the “low-class” feeling of other “grousing” sites. I think this is attributed to the many excellent postings by users here from both sides of the fences.
Cpt on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 6:53 pm
Well done. keep up the good work.
qussl3 on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 8:38 pm
As btan put it, there is a tremendous amount of competition outside of the politics space for readers and frankly i’d rather get my entertainment, sports, tech….. etc news elsewhere.
Just make sure that the TR ’says it like it is’ and not fall into the trap of pandering to its readership, for now comments on political articles seem largely against the incumbent, what if that changes?
As long as you give equal airtime and fair treatment for news relating to both govt and opposition – positive or negative, viewers will appreciate it.
Let the comments fall where they may, as long as you keep the censorship sensible (racism, vulgarities) and let the opinions flow, no one can fault you for floating an imagined bias.
It is pretty clear that singaporeans want an outlet to vent their political opinions, why shy away from that – embrace it instead, as long as the TR is fair you’ll do fine.
For all you know maybe one day singaporeans will be here complaining about how parliament is girdlocked or how the whatchamacallit party is screwing things up and how we should bring PAP v2020 back
silenceisgolden on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 9:23 pm
Well it is understandable that TR doesn’t want to be an opposition mouth piece but in the first place it is all your own doing. You started attracting readership by offering an alternative voice in politics whether international or not.
If daily you are giving only doses of economy and business stories regardless how well it is written you bet the click will start dwindling.
It may seems to you that TR is a critical site, but no to its many readers, they have an objective. Clearly they wish to influence other like minded people when they say their peace and by no small way, they help to bring in the click.
Your objective of eventually shedding this type of reader off will see your position quickly overtaken by someone else who by now knows of the existence of the large pool of this type of readers.
You have already started the ball rolling.
Telling these people please forget about politics, we are going economy and still wish that they come to your site is wishful thinking.
matulos on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 10:03 pm
Excellent achievement, Temasek Review!
For what it’s worth, it seems that the winning formula has a lot to do with not pulling any punches, staying with the facts and calling things the way you see them. Leave “fair and balanced” to the infamous Fox News, which in its own way has been no less of a mouthpiece for the incumbent interests than our #152-ranked state times.
For sure, it’s tough being the lightning rod in a sea of officially-sanctioned mediocrity. But if you were to steer your content into the mainstream, the whole point would be lost. It would be like U2 going from an edgy rock band to… er… sellout kings.
As the inimitable Gordon Sumner (aka Sting) said… “I could destroy myself to be the perfect man / She might prefer me as I am”.
amy on Mon, 12th Oct 2009 11:03 pm
@@For a long time, the conventional wisdom among journalists and bloggers is that “objective” sites are more “credible” than “critical” sites and will thereby attract more readers.@@
So you are saying a site is less credible if it is critical? I am probably not “conventional” because I find it difficult to understand and agree with this statement. How can a site be more credible if it refrain from being critical even when criticism is called for? A site should be more credible if it give praise where praise is due, and give criticism where criticism is due. Not by being one sided and refrain from being critical and trying to look “objective”, whatever that is.
I moved away from State times, Channel News Asia and come over here because I feel that down here is more credible and objective because there is some element of being critical rather than one sided.
So my view is that increasing the content of business, economics and other areas is well and fine, but do not intentionally and one sidedly suppress or reduce the political and critical content.
kknd on Tue, 13th Oct 2009 1:22 am
Great job.
The only bad thing is: your site is blocked at my workplace. A lot of sites were blocked eg. horoscopes = Folklore category, jokes = Tasteless category, comics = Sex category, anime list sites = Peer 2 Peer category. I think your site is under the ‘Political Organizations/Advocacy’ category.
No conspiracy, just a control freak network admin.
admin on Tue, 13th Oct 2009 10:40 am
Hi Kknd,
You can try accessing our site through this proxy:
http://www.vtunnel.com
J Ho on Tue, 13th Oct 2009 10:48 am
I believe, for a media outlet to be aiming to take a more balanced, objective view of current events, at the risk of reducing readership numbers is an honourable thing.
I feel far too many media agencies, particularly in the West, will bow to readership (economic) considerations at the expense of providing an objective analysis of what is going on in society and the world.
I believe a lot of Western style jounalism creates division, mistrust and emnity between peoples in situations where more balanced, even-handed analysis of current events would lead to greater understanding and mutual respect between people.
I sincerely hope you able to achieve this more objective, balanced journalism that you are aiming for.
Good luck.
btan on Tue, 13th Oct 2009 12:11 pm
@TR
LOL… http://www.vtunnel.com is blocked in *my* company but luckily your site is not…I think the websense (more like web nonsense) thinks yours is a news site.