Minister for National Development Lawrence Wong has in a recent press conference stated that the government keeps in line with advice from the World Health Organisation (WHO).
While keeping in line with an international body such as the WHO is understandable, the government’s choice of words in dispensing its advice does not seem to match that given by other countries.
For example, the rest of the world calls measures taken to shut down schools and the like “Lockdown”, the government has decided to call what is happening in Singapore “Circuit Breaker”. Are they trying to be different just for the sake of it? Most Singaporeans have access to international media and are kept up to date with what is happening in the rest of the world. Isn’t using different terminology for basically the same thing confusing?
This is NOT the time to show that we are creative! The government has deployed the police to spot check and punish people who are still going out in groups. But could it be that the people particularly the seniors, don’t really understand what “circuit breaker” — whether in English or Mandarin — really means? The term “lock down” is however very clear. The use of a term used in many other countries might send a better and stronger message.
If Wong claims that Singapore is following the WHO’s advice, why is the government coining its own unclear phrases such as “circuit breaker”?
In times of uncertainty such as these, people want clarity! Not wishy washy language.
Either we wear a mask or not. Why unclear phrases like “no longer discourage people who are well from wearing masks”? It is not as if the government has a problem with telling people what to do in other instances. Why suddenly so coy?
In trying times, people want things to be clear. It is not the time for flowery language that is subject to interpretation. For example, to monitor the spread of the virus, it would be sufficient to say “linked cases” or “unlinked cases”. It is black or white. Everyone understands.
In Singapore, we say “contact tracing pending”. How is this helpful? No point saying right? Just tell us the answer when you know? Please don’t throw in more useless information to confuse the situation.
Is the government even joined up in its approach?
And even in these perilous times, the government has introduced ways to pat itself on the back. “Situation under control but more steps to be taken”.  Basically “more steps to be taken” means not under control right? Why not just say “outbreak worsens, existing measures insufficient”?
While the Singapore government has done relatively well, that is for us to say. Not for them to build in language  to praise themselves.

 

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

NUS also honours Dr M’s wife in addition to Dr Mahathir

It was earlier reported that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, Ho Ching,…

2018 is Singapore’s Eighth Warmest Year on Record

Singaporeans faced the eight warmest year on record in 2018 as the…

为辩论贸易课题 中美主播隔空“舌战”

美国霍士财经频道女主播翠西(Trish Regan),于今早八时邀请中国环球电视网(CGTN)女主播刘欣作为其节目《黄金时间》嘉宾,针对中美贸易战课题展开公开辩论。 翠西一开始说明,这是难得的机会,让美国观众在此课题上聆听不同的观点,翠西表示自己不代表美国政府,而其“辩论对手”则代表中国共产党,惟她在节目中愿意欢迎各种异议。 刘欣一开始则澄清,本身并非中国共产党员,不应假定她是为中国政府说话,而她是作为一名中国环球电视网记者与特里斯对话。不过翠西则嘀咕说其实CGTN也是共产党的一部分。 翠西首先询问刘欣意见,即中美之间有没有可能达成协议,对此刘欣称自己没有内部消息,所以不清楚中美贸易谈判会有往哪进展,但认为中国政府已经非常明确地表明立场,除非美方也对中国谈判团表达尊重,愿意谈判而不是利用外部施压,那么协议还可能达成,否则恐怕对立还会持续。 翠西则回应自己也不认为贸易战对谁会有好处,“我真的希望可以解决,”但她也抛出知识产权问题,也列举出一些中国企业盗窃知识产权的例子。他说美国企业可能投入钜资、耗费十几年才研发成功,又如何让他们承担在中国概念、研究被盗窃的风险。 刘欣则回应,翠西可访问那些到中国营业的美企他们的看法,“但据我了解他们当中许多都盈利颇丰,而且大部分也愿意继续投资在中国,然而川普政府却让前景增添不确定。” 刘欣不否认又出现盗窃知识产权、商业机密的问题,但中国政府和人民对于知识产权保护是有共识的;再者,盗窃产权问题在各国都有,在美国也有企业相互诉讼对方盗版,不能以偏概全。 当翠西问道有关华为是否愿意与美国共享它的先进技术,刘欣认为若双方互惠互利、相互学习,照规矩付费是没问题的,中美都在彼此学习。“我们可以互惠互利,就我个人而言,我学习英文,因为我有一个美国的老师,我跟美国的朋友去学。” 翠西:何时中国才会停止跟世界银行借钱 接下来翠西再抛出一个辛辣问题,她指中国已然是全球第二大经济体,但何时才肯放下发展中国家身份,不再向世界银行借钱? 刘欣则回应:“我们也想壮大,不想被一直看扁成侏儒、贫穷国家,但视你如何定义发展中国家,中国有14亿人口,是美国的三倍,人均GDP还不到美国的六分之一,甚至还不如欧洲一些发达国家。”…

From Egypt to Afghanistan : Free woman, free world

Sherif Samir, writing from Egypt In the past year, during the rule…