Thursday, January 10, 2013

Don't drive online debate underground

Jan 10, 2013

WHILE I cannot presume to judge whether or not blogger Alex Au's article or the comments it attracted were defamatory, [Well, why don't you read them and decide?] I am concerned that serving a letter of demand on him may not be entirely in the public interest ("PM asks blogger to remove 'defamatory post'"; last Saturday).

[So... public interest is better served by allowing baseless accusations about the integrity and intent of publicly elected officials to stand unchallenged? How so?]

Sunday, January 6, 2013

Rate advertisements for sexism

Jan 03, 2013
 
PG MOVIE ON FREE-TO-AIR CHANNEL

I CAUGHT the late-night screening of the movie You, Me And Dupree on free-to-air television on Christmas Day.

The 109 minute-long movie aired from 12.45am to 3am and was interspersed with advertisements.

What I did not expect was the repeated airing of a few advertisements that drew attention to the female body and offered breast enhancement, weight-loss programmes and hair-loss treatment.

One advertisement, which focused entirely on close-up images of a model's exposed cleavage, and flaunted her presumably augmented breasts, was lewd and subliminally pornographic.

Another showed the drastic weight loss of a young mother and her progression from being an oversize to an XS size.

The message suggested that excessive weight gain as a result of childbearing is crushing to a woman's self-esteem.

It did not offer any information on the health risks of obesity, or the benefits of staying healthy.

In yet another commercial, a young wife is visibly distressed when her husband tells her that her crowning glory is thinning.

Her crisis was not over a life-threatening illness but the fear of looking unattractive to her husband.

Sexism was the common thread in all these commercials, with in-your-face messages that a woman's self-esteem can be repaired simply with breast augmentation, weight loss and hair-loss treatment.

While it is important for every person - man or woman - to keep good health and hygiene habits, I was offended by the sexual objectification of women in these messages.

Ironically, while the movie carried a PG-13 rating, there was nothing to warn me of the sexist contents in TV commercials that could be offensive to me as a woman.

For a long time, Singapore has had legislation that prohibits tobacco advertising and limits the screening of alcohol commercials.

In the wake of the recent heinous gang-rape in New Delhi and the global outcry for the protection of women against violence, maybe it is time our media and advertising regulatory bodies also look into the content, presentation and impact of print and TV advertisements to rate them for sexism, ageism and all forms of discrimination against women.

Eve Loh (Ms)

[Yes, the answer to hyperbole in advertisement is.... hyperbole in your complaint against them!

Yes the advertisements were tasteless... however, using the gang-rape victim to "sell" your point was also tasteless. Yes, every little bit of social and cultural conditioning may well add to the overall sense of oppression and devaluation of women, but it is a loooooong jump to the conclusion that an advertisement working on a young wife's fear of losing her hair would lead to indiscriminate, inevitable, and a proliferation of gang-rapes in our society.

Or ads on breast enhancement and weight-loss.

Moreover, these ads were aired in the late-night slot where the authorities have rightly exiled these tasteless, baseless, and valueless advertisements.This is almost the same time slots as those ads selling those products, "as seen on TV".

Advertisements on late-night TV serves a purpose, it provides breaks for you to refresh your drink, take a toilet break, check your email on your iPad, messages on your iPhone, and sms on your mobile phone. Only people with no social life, and a weak sense of self, pay close attention to those ads and get upset by them.]




Thursday, January 3, 2013

View volunteerism positively

Jan 03, 2013
 
[First, this will not be one of my usual caustic rant against morons who write letters to the forum page.

As someone who DOESN'T volunteer, I admire those who do, and respect those who wants to.]


SINGAPORE ranked near the bottom on helping strangers in the 2011 World Giving Index survey conducted by Charities Aid Foundation ("Ask, and you will receive"; Dec 21). The Philippines and Hong Kong scored respectable 26th and 33rd positions respectively in the 146-nation ranking.

We should not attribute our poor ranking to survey methodology, as suggested by those interviewed in the article.

Malaysia, China and Japan were also near the bottom, and India ranked last. My guess is that cultural factors are to blame.

[Why? One might argue that we have the same culture and same level of development as Hong Kong!]

Singapore also fared very badly on volunteering time and donating money, according to the statistics available on the foundation's website.

On volunteering time, Singapore was also ranked near the bottom, behind the Philippines, Sri Lanka and Indonesia, which were ranked fifth, sixth and 10th.

[I do agree that the cultural milieu may have something to do with it... if by culture you mean affluence and a highly urbanised society, with a highly pressurised lifestyle. Then again, HK puts paid to that theory, no?]

Singapore was ranked 53rd in monetary donations, lagging behind Indonesia, Thailand and Hong Kong who were among the top 10.

We should do more self-reflection, and review the environment and existing regulations on charity and volunteerism activities here.

Two weeks ago, I helped in the flag day of the Lions Home for the Elderly. At first, I worked at a bus stop but later decided to work at a hawker centre nearby. I took a short cut by walking through a shopping mall. Within seconds of entering the mall, a security guard approached me and asked me to leave.

Based on my experience, there may be a few who do not like to be approached in public places and asked to donate money; but the majority do not mind. Some even compliment the volunteers. Those who have children with them would often ask their children to put the money into the collection tin, teaching them about charity in the process.

[Seriously? You think kids learn charity that way?]

In 2011, Singaporeans contributed $896 million in tax deductible donations alone. In terms of dollars per capita, the figure is one of the highest in the world.

However, the Charities Aid Foundation survey showed that only 29 per cent of Singaporeans donated in 2011, compared with 71 per cent among Indonesians and Thais. This was how we lost out in ranking. We need to expand the base of our donating population.

This also applies to helping strangers and volunteering time - more should come forward to boost our meagre participation rates.

Ng Ya Ken