If you're someone who did not follow the Lee Wei Ling (LWL) versus Janadas Devan (JD)/Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) story and flipped open The Straits Times (ST) forum page today (Apr 5), you'll likely to go "WTH just happened?" after seeing three letters (here, here, and here) in the forum on this issue, including one from its editor.

ST certainly has a weird way of reporting about the brouhaha - it did not carry any news report regarding the issue; just a sudden barrage of forum letters.

Guess Captain Context was on leave today.

In case you are hiding under a rock:

Dr LWL, 61, announced on April Fools’ Day that she would no longer write for ST, citing a lack of freedom of speech.

LWL subsequently implied (her post below) that the three ST editors who oversaw her commentaries had been instructed to edit out “sensitive issues”, which probably caused JD to respond on her FB (which was published as one of the letters on ST Forum today).

Here are three observations why we think 170-year old ST is behaving rather strangely about this incident. Maybe age is catching up.

First, it chose not to report about the incident at all.

This is in contrast with its competitor TODAY, which deemed it newsworthy enough to interview JD and report about it.

Maybe ST did not manage to reach JD because he was "currently travelling" (see the full text from TODAY below).

Responding to TODAY’s queries via text messages, the 61-year-old senior government official, who is currently travelling, stressed that he posted responses to Dr Lee’s comments in his private capacity. TODAY, April 4.

But how can they not contact JD? ST must have sought JD's permission to publish his post in full as a forum letter, right?

In TODAY's article, JD stressed that he posted responses to LWL in his private capacity, but ST did not publish JD's post "in his private capacity", but as a "former ST Associate Editor". Why the change, unless there was some communication, no?

Yet, after all these, ST chose not to carry a story about the issue.

Second, ST chose to carry three letters in the forum. Without any context at all. 

Imagine you are a long-time ST subscriber who does not Internet.

And you see three letters published in the forum that were not in response to any ST articles that were published.

You would be puzzled as to whether you have forgot to read this "newspaper of record".

In other words, it's quite a similar experience to someone who has never watched Game of Thrones to suddenly start watching in the middle of season 4 - minus the blood, sex, and dragons.

Maybe ST is getting their readers to undergo a course in investigative journalism, for this is what one has to do before understanding the story in full.

You probably have to google search "Dr Lee Wei Ling" or "Lee Wei Ling" or "Lee Wei Ling Facebook" and try to find what the editor meant by her "Facebook post last Friday".

If you manage to find her Facebook page, you will notice that there are two posts. #justsaying

Third, ST's omission of not mentioning LWL's FB posts means that its coverage of the issue was not balanced.

An ST reader would be none the wiser about what LWL had said so far.

This is because ST is just presenting one side of the story - ST editor's version which is quoting what LWL said without sufficient context, JD's version, and their interpretation of LWL's Facebook posts.

As a reminder to the ST editors to be balanced and objective, this was what Prime Minister (PM) Lee Hsien Loong said in its 170th birthday in July 2015:

"While you are adapting and finding new ways to produce a high-quality and commercially successful newspaper, you must continue to be conscious of your important role in Singapore, and continue to maintain your hallmark of credible, balanced and objective reporting. As the newspaper of record, you have standing in our society. You are not a fly by night piece of paper circulated in dark alleys when nobody is looking...So you are not just an observer and reporter of what happens, though that is your principle role, but you must also remember that what you report and how you report also inevitably influences people’s opinions, and the course of events in Singapore...I hope you will continue to maintain a balance, take a long-term perspective of Singapore’s interests, and report the news for Singaporeans through Singaporean eyes. Inform, educate and entertain – roughly in that order".

Let's hope ST can do better in its 171st year of existence and maintain its role as Singapore's newspaper of record.

Related articles:

The salt is very real between Lee Wei Ling and Janadas Devan in latest exchange

Online spat between Chief of Govt Communications & LKY’s daughter about LKY’s blurb on book

Top photo from Straits Times Facebook.

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