Highly authoritative Pulitzer prize-winning newspaper, The Guardian, has resorted to the oldest trick in the book to boost page views.

In an article (Jan. 5) with an attention grabbing headline (The price of life in Singapore, city of rules: 'It’s a Faustian deal'), one Oliver Milman - a reporter at Guardian Australia - painted a rather bleak picture of Singapore with several sensational claims.

In Singapore's parlance, they just did a New Paper.

Worse, they only interviewed three people for the story.

Even worst, it appears that the journalist was only here for three days.

Who is a Singapore expert? Where do you go if you're there for three days?

— Oliver Milman (@olliemilman) November 30, 2014

And he does not seem too familiar with our home at all.

And his idea of a caffeine break? Tea at Raffles Hotel and a photo of The Toast Box.

Cup of tea (Darjeeling) at Raffles hotel pic.twitter.com/ohdN5IGo4v

— Oliver Milman (@olliemilman) December 3, 2014

Singapore has my toast needs covered pic.twitter.com/gprjCBAZpD

— Oliver Milman (@olliemilman) December 1, 2014

Below are 8 mistakes that a true-blue journalist of Singapore will not make:

1. Using signboards as a snapshot of our daily lives

Yes, we also do not breathe. But that's a story for another day.

The point is that the photo was probably used out of context. This signage, according to TripAdvisor, is found at Gardens by the Bay.

Judging from the yellow railings, it could well be a signage for the Supertrees.

You don't want to lean, jump or run there, do you? Our only crime? Being Captain Obvious.

2. The import of chewing gum is banned, therefore globs of the stuff aren’t found on the street.

Really? Are we still talking about chewing gum? This topic is so old school that the organisers of the Retrolicious concert might invite the gum soon. Hand on heart, how many of you all still visit Johor Bahru to smuggle copious amount of gum? We believe there are other cheaper and more items worth our while.

3. There are fines for irritating people with a musical instrument or your own drunkenness.

We are not well-versed in law but we are sure the writer was exaggerating. Unless said musical instrument is a recorder. Never let primary school pupils run wild with recorders. Those things are nasty.

 4. Uttering an obscene song lyric or obstructing someone as they walk carries the threat of jail.

But Purple Light was already banned! No more obscene song lyric to utter. Not sure about the obstruction though, does that mean all those standing on the right side of escalators will be jailed? Please advise.

5. “You can’t buy a flat if you’re single, which my generation isn’t too happy about,” says Samantha de Silva, a 31-year-old entrepreneur.

We empathise with you Samantha. But technically, you can buy a flat four years later, when you are 35.

6. Car ownership is also banned, unless you purchase one of a set number of expensive permits first. 

To ban or not to ban - that's not the question.

The question is: can you afford it? We will complain together with you if you are talking about the affordability of cars in Singapore.

7. The government doesn’t drag people off the streets, but the populace acts as if it could be a possibility.

And yet the writer quoted Samantha as saying: "Kids now see things differently; they don’t have the fear of the older generations." Does the populace mean older folks? Please advise.

8. The result is a low-crime, scrupulously run city – with none of the incomprehensible, exciting chaos of cities found in neighbouring Indonesia or Malaysia.

Some of us don't mind giving exciting chaos a miss. If that means knowing that a grenade won't explode in front of you after a few rounds of booze. Thank you very much.

To prove that they are the authority in all things journalistic,  the Pulitzer-prize winning news outlet interviewed a grand total of three persons for an overview of Singapore and its politics: a cartoonist, a blogger and an entrepreneur.

How about interviewing a politician? Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief Chee Soon Juan used to contribute to The Guardian, you know.

We guess this is just The Guardian's way of balanced reporting: One critical article after two positive advertorials of Singapore (click here and here).

Okay, we will be expecting one more negative one just to even the score.

Anyway, check out some of the comments defending Singapore:

And the fact is that there are problems in Singapore and this journalist should have provided a more nuanced analysis of the place.

For example, one needs to step out of the city and spend some time in rental flats. Then he can talk to children who don't even have pocket money.

Or talk to the aged without next-of-kin. And the drug-addled underclass.

The irony is that the journalist is doing the government a great service with his reporting. Even the government can't paint a stereotypical ang moh liberal journalist better.

He stayed in Singapore (likely at the Raffles Hotel) for three days and criticised S'pore using the most superficial arguments.

It seems like The Guardian has hit their quota with 12,000 shares on social media. You can do yourself a favour and their numbers a disservice by not reading it.

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