Poet-playwright Alfian Sa'at has hit back at The Straits Times for running a story that could potentially compromise his personal safety, especially during this period of unprecedented large-scale mourning for founding prime minister Lee Kuan Yew.

This was after ST ran a story on March 27, 2015, titled: "Playwright Alfian Sa'at questions LKY legacy", by Akshita Nanda.

In it, the newspaper subtly accused Alfian of making light of Lee Kuan Yew's passing and criticising his legacy.

ST wrote:

On Wednesday, playwright and poet Alfian Sa'at, 38, posted a satire on his Facebook page condemning what he viewed as exaggerated eulogies that popularise the "fishing village myth" of Singapore, the idea that Mr Lee "conjured gleaming skyscrapers out of a primordial swamp". In later comments he said he has observed a "historical revisionism free-for-all" this week.

Click on picture to go to article:

However, Alfian has hit back at the English broadsheet in a Facebook post.

In it, he wrote that not only does he stand by what he had previously written about Lee Kuan Yew in his original posts, he also explained the context of his writing and shed light on the conversation he had with the reporter prior to the article's publication.

He also claimed he declined to be interviewed for the story but the newspaper saw fit to publish the piece anyways.

This is what Alfian wrote:

And also I had published most of the stuff on the second and third day. The ST article would come out on a Saturday--just one day before the funeral.

For the record, I stand by 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 throw in a sideshow.

He also drew attention at the end of his post to the cavalier attitude of the reporter towards his personal safety.

We have contacted the reporter and will update this post with any comments if or when she replies.

You can read what Alfian wrote here:

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.

And also I had published most of the stuff on the second and third day. The ST article would come out on a Saturday--just one day before the funeral.

For the record, I stand by 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 throw 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.

Related articles:

Today newspaper apologises for misrepresenting Low Thia Khiang’s tribute to LKY in Parliament

Turns out Straits Times had also misinterpreted Low Thia Khiang’s Mandarin tribute to Lee Kuan Yew

Government rebuts The Real Singapore site for claiming that City Hall MRT is in chaos

Lee Kuan Yew, the scourge of liberal western media, is on the cover of TIME

Resorts World Sentosa casino to close for 4 hours on Sunday as mark of respect for Lee Kuan Yew

Top photo via

If you like what you read, follow us on Facebook and Twitter to get the latest updates.