As the saga of Singapore Press Holdings (SPH) and an NTU student with COVID-19 continued, the public was previously updated with a response provided by the editor of NewsHub at SPH, Han Yong May on 13 May.
This incident began when an NTU student, Quah Zheng Jie, called out Chinese daily Lianhe Wanbao in a Facebook post, for fabricating an interview based on his COVID-19 experience.
Yesterday (14 May), Quah Zheng Jie wrote a Facebook note in response to Ms Han’s open letter. Mr Quah revealed that apart from the apology coming from Ms Han, he had also received an e-mail response from SPH’s legal counsel.
Mr Quah expressed that he was disappointed that both responses did not fully address his points that he raised in his first write-up.
In his latest open letter, the NTU student wanted to point out that “James” – an acquaintance of his – did somehow fabricate his story, despite Ms Han claimed that “James'” story was based on extracts from Mr Quah’s Instagram Stories.

Debunking “James'” fake news

Considering how “James” framed the story in a way that Mr Quah contracted COVID-19 when he “stayed at home” during the Circuit Breaker (CB) period, the student decided to reveal the truth of his whereabouts and process, debunking “James'” story all at once.
Mr Quah described that a week before the commencement of CB, he did go out of his home for exercise, visit his friend, and attend medical appointments.
“James” claimed that during CB, Mr Quah stayed at home and did home-based learning. However, the latter revealed that he went to the doctor five days prior to his diagnosis and that he never did any home-based learning.
Mr Quah went on to admit that most symptoms “James” reported were accurate, however, the student questioned how the reporter managed to obtain the information – losing the sense of taste – since he never publicised this symptom onto social media.
Apart from the factual information above, he corrected “James” that he went for a swab test on the night of 13 May, instead of the morning of that very day.
In regards to reporting Mr Quah’s admission to Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, he revealed that he told “James” via personal message before getting to know that the latter is a reporter.
After knowing that “James” is a reporter, the student told him not to publish this piece of information.
Even after denying permission to publish his location, the reporter deliberately ignored it and included the information in his story anyway.
Mr Quah proceeded to condemn how inaccurate the published story was when “James” decided to make up stories about his family as he never once publicised any updates regarding his family.
Seeing how “James'” story reported that Mr Quah’s family had undergone swab tests, the student clarified that none of his family screened for COVID-19. Instead, they were given Quarantine Orders, and a swab test would be required if symptoms appeared.
He had also clarified that his parents work in the essential services industry, thus, they had to travel to work every day during CB. They were in fact, not “staying at home” all the time during this period.

Source: Quah Zheng Jie / Facebook

Mr Quah baffled at how the fake news managed to be approved

As Ms Han explained that “James” is a fairly new reporter at the organisation, Mr Quah wondered why his fake news could be approved by editors and typesetters.
Especially when this particular story made it onto the front page, the student assumed that this news must have been viewed as “important” and “exclusive”.
Mr Quah had also expressed that he and his family were psychologically affected by how easily identifiable he was in the fake news, even though his surname and family circumstances had been modified to cover up his identity.

Questioning the purpose of this fake news

As claimed by SPH, this particular story was published as a follow-up to the public’s concerns about the number of untraceable COVID-19 community cases.
However, Mr Quah noted that the entire fake news had created a certain level of paranoia among the public who had read it. He pointed out how SPH had “downplayed” his pre-CB routine, as well as making up how his parents “stayed at home” during CB and would still “risk” contracting the coronavirus.
He questioned the intention behind publishing this fake news, assuming that the organisation clearly knew that it is unproven and unconsented.

Publishing his story against his wishes

It was horrifying when Mr Quah found out that his personal story was being published onto Lianhe Wanbao without his consent. He was concerned that “James” published his story anyway even after rejecting the reporter.
The student was upset that SPH defended their actions “by implying that his social media was publicly available”, without acknowledging their fake story concocted based on his Instagram Stories.
Basically, he wanted to question if the media has the right to publish citizens’ personal information and experience even when he had already said “no”.
This entire “NTU student versus SPH” saga mainly stemmed from “James” using Mr Quah’s story without consent.
Not forgetting to acknowledge the importance of reporters’ role, Mr Quah hoped that fresh journalists like “James” can be supervised more.

“Therefore, I hope that fresh journalists (like James) can be supervised more, with additional layers of vetting of their publication drafts. This ensures accuracy of information, allowing the media to fulfil their sacred responsibilities.”

Regardless of what kind of disciplinary actions “James” would be facing, Mr Quah said that he would respect SPH’s decisions. He also thanked SPH for their swift response in setting up an independent committee to review this matter.
To disclaim the relationship between the student and “James”, he had also revealed that both of them only met once in the past, and “James” is merely an acquaintance. Mr Quah clarified that he and the reporter are in fact, not at all close.
Lastly, the student declared that this would be the last time he would address this issue against SPH and Lianhe Wanbao because he was physically and mentally drained.
He ended his Facebook note with a compilation of his Instagram Stories that showed his experience at EXPO.

Source: Quah Zheng Jie / Facebook
 
 

Subscribe
Notify of
3 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Facebook post about compulsory course on foreign interference is inaccurate says NUS

On Wednesday (25 September), a Facebook page called NUSSU – NUS Student’s…

探讨异议课程遭耶鲁-国大学院腰斩 亚菲言:异议就是说不的艺术

“如果我们就连腾出空间去倾听那些说不的人,也做不到,那么民主已死。” 据报导,耶鲁—国大学院临时取消一门名为《新加坡的异议与抵抗》的课程。有关课程将由新加坡知名剧作家亚菲言(Alfian Sa’at),与参与学生探讨本土的公民抗命模式。 有关课程原本计划在本月27日至10月5日进行,结果在开课前两周就被喊停。耶鲁—国大学院校长陈大荣教授,则在受询时向媒体解释,课程“未批判性地接触多元观点,这对于探讨围绕在异议周边的政治、社会和伦理议题,去做作妥当的学术检视是需要的”。 他续指,有关课程建议的活动和选取的讲员,也有损该校不把政党政治利益带入校园的承诺。 他也指出一些活动建议包括“可能使学生面临违法风险、或面对法律责任的元素”。 课程原本由本地剧作家亚菲言和课程经理Tan Yock Theng负责。 亚菲言对于本地时政课题向来有话直说,他著作的诗歌、剧作和短片等,也常触碰诸如政治、性别和族群等议题。 课程活动之一,包括观看独立制片人苏德祥制作“光谱行动”纪录片《1987解开阴谋》(1987: Untracing…

【冠状病毒19】确诊患者曾到访珍珠坊和珍珠大厦

冠状病毒19确诊病患曾于本月13日到访珍珠坊和珍珠大厦。 据卫生部昨日(16日)发布的文告,确诊病患到访的具体日期和时间如下: 1)    珍珠坊:9月13日(中午12时10分至12时50分) 2)    珍珠大厦:9月13日(中午12时45分至下午2时05分) 当局表示,若公众曾在上述同一时段到访,应密切留意自己的身体状况。与此同时,当局也与确诊病例密切接触的人发出通知,一旦出现急性呼吸道感染症状,或有发烧或失去味觉和嗅觉,应尽快去看医生,并通知医生曾到访的地点。

Driver and passenger escape unharmed after car catches fire at Tampines junction

A car was seen engulfed in huge flames in the middle of…