At the World Economic Forum (WEF) and World Health Organisation (WHO) joint briefing on the COVID-19 response in the Asia-Pacific yesterday (14 May), SPH Editor-in-Chief Warren Fernandez defended the Singapore government’s response to the COVID-19 outbreak.
He said that Singapore had started out responding to the coronavirus with Sars in mind, but later felt it was more similar to H1N1 influenza. Indeed, while addressing the nation on 8 Feb, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong even said the new virus is much closer to influenza than Sars in terms of mortality.
But Fernandez noted that when more information emerged and more became known about asymptomatic cases, Singapore’s position on masks also changed.
“I was glad that the politicians had the courage to make a change on the position as the evidence changed, rather than digging their heels in,” he said, praising the government.
“I think that’s the way the media ought to encourage the discussion going forward, so that it is evidence-based and scientifically sound and not just based on political rhetoric.”
No need to wear masks if one is well
Earlier this year when COVID-19 started surfacing in Singapore, the government’s initial response was asking people not to wear masks when one is well. In places like Hong Kong, China and Taiwan, the authorities were already encouraging people to wear masks even if one is well.

In fact, Minister for Trade and Industry Chan Chun Sing even ridiculed Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam’s decision to wear surgical masks in public (‘Singapore hospitals would suffer if leaders wore masks like Hong Kong’s Carrie Lam: minister‘, 18 Feb).
Chan said that if Singapore had followed in Hong Kong’s footsteps “without thinking”, with its leaders wearing masks to give updates on the virus outbreak and causing panic, “I can guarantee you, today our hospital system would have broken down”, he said.
Then on 3 Apr, PM Lee made a U-turn and announced that the authorities will “no longer discourage people from wearing masks”. He said the Government is concerned about “some cases out there community going undetected” even if there are few of them. “We also now have evidence that an infected person can show no symptoms, and yet still pass on the virus to others,” he said. “We will no longer discourage people from wearing masks.”
Fernandez: ST can weather the storm
At the WEF and WHO joint briefing which was held online, the SPH Editor-in-Chief also talked about the need to have “good, credible, reliable information”.
“We feel that without good, credible, reliable information, the kind of debates and discussion we’re having today – reasoned and rational debate on what to do with the pandemic and how to take ourselves forward – won’t be possible,” he said. “It’s not an issue just for journalists or editors, it’s a societal issue.”
Another role the media plays is encouraging discussion that is evidence-based, he added.
On the financial health of Straits Times (ST), he said that the paper is still “relatively robust” and will be “able to weather the storm”.
ST reader reveals newspaper edited his letter out of context
In any case, speaking of media providing “good, credible, reliable information”, a member of the public, Dr Kho Kwang Po, recently (10 May) posted a note on his Facebook page revealing that ST had edited out a crucial sentence from a forum letter he submitted in Jan, which altered the main point of his letter entirely (‘Reader says ST edited his letter out of context to support Govt’s call not to wear masks if one is well‘).
“Straits Times forum has the bad habit of editing letters to reflect or confirm their own or govt’s stance on various issues… like mask usage,” Dr Kho lamented.
“They edited my letter to make it look like I supported the ‘no mask if not sick’ advice of the govt. This is completely deplorable and irresponsible.”
Dr Kho then went on to say that ST actually deleted the following important sentence from his letter:

“Those who do not wish to be infected should don N95 masks especially in crowded confined areas”

“(This) was deleted to make it appear I agreed with the govt’s disastrous no mask advice supported by Dr Leong Hoe Nam, Prof Dale Fisher and MOH,” Dr Kho added.
Another Facebook user replied to Dr Kho, “Why bother to write. I have given up long ago. No longer interested in anything here. Waiting to live out my life elsewhere.”
Reading the edited ST Forum letter from Dr Kho would have given the impression to readers that he actually supported the government’s call not to wear masks if one is well, which was the government’s prevailing stance early this year.
 

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

续柯政杰之后 女律师也叙述因错误报导,遭致网络霸凌经历

日前,网民柯政杰在脸书揭发,《联合晚报》记者在未经其同意下,根据其个人社交媒体照片作报导。对此,《联合早报》总编辑韩咏梅在本月13日发表致读者公开信,提及记者违反工作原则,也向事主致歉。 柯政杰坦言,确诊后的康复令人身心俱疲,也希望自己的经历,能提醒记者们,也呼吁民众需保持批判态度,不要看表面就照单全收。 对此,一名知识产权律师莫素玲,也在脸书发文表示,对于柯政杰的经历感同身受,特别是本身也是报业控股旗下媒体,误导性标题和报导的受害者之一。 莫素玲在2014年1月2日遇上一场车祸,当天还是她到新公司上班的首日。车祸受伤后她必须留院数周,不幸的是几个月后她失业了。 她指出,遗憾的是《新明日报》和《海峡时报》在2019年9月和11月的报导,也出现错误报导,甚至致使她饱受网络霸凌。 根据誌期2019年9月10日,标题为《女律师被撞  告德士叔索赔760万》的报导,指莫素玲女律师开车时被后方德士撞上,称伤势影响她的前途和升职机会,起诉德士司机索赔760万元。 “向保险公司索赔” 然而,莫素玲解释,尽管技术上德士司机被列为诉讼答辩方之一,但索偿是针对德士司机的保险公司,并不是针对司机。 “保险公司在诉讼的每个阶段,都对我的索赔提出异议,对我而言,这形同是大卫对抗企业巨人的诉讼战。” 至于报导称,司法委员裁定,德士司机需承担100巴仙责任,莫素玲也解释这不属实,司机并没有被要求负上100巴仙责任,且司机并没有如《新明日报》贴文所描述的那样“赔惨了”。 不曾提出因失去前途而索赔…

DPM Heng Swee Keat toasts to frontline workers as part of #toast2uchallenge

In a Facebook video on Sunday (6 Dec), Deputy Prime Minister (DPM)…

Think Centre: Statement on Singapore’s first Prime Minister’s Passing

By Think Centre Mr. Lee Kuan Yew was a visionary who inspired…