From a Singapore Angle

The AcidFlask Affair on From a Singapore Angle:
(Apr 25+) A Sad Day for the Singapore Blogosphere
(Apr 29+) The AcidFlask Affair in ether and beyond
(May 4+) CNA picks up the AcidFlask Affair (incl. 1st TODAY articles)
(May 6+) AcidFlask's Press Statement Published (incl. 2nd CNA article)
(May 6+) Plea addressed to my fellow bloggers

Scroll down for latest updates

The AcidFlask Affair--and its precursor: the Convex Set Incident--finally broke into the pages of our national press. Both can be found under the "Singapore" section of the "Print Edition" available on STI. The two reports are:

"Jeremy Chen: Sorry" (May 7)

"Blogger faces threat of law suit--A*Star demands apology from ex-scholar for alleged defamatory remarks", by Chang Ai-Lien and Melissa Lwee (May 7)

First, a non-issue: "Web log" is as acceptable as "weblog", according to the Wiki, even though the former also refers to "a list that is kept by your Web server which details all the files it was requested to send and whether it was able to send them successfully" (see this).

(2025 hrs May 6 -0400) Just read two more references (hat tip: Singapore Ink):

TODAYonline (May 7), "Simple apology not enough, says A*Star--It wants 'unreserved apology' from PhD student by Sunday", by Ansley Ng

TODAYonline (May 7), "To speak up or not to speak up?" by Lim Boon Hee

(2030 hrs May 6 -0400) Another international organisation--the Committee to Protect Journalists--picks up the item:

CPJ News Alert 2005 (May 5), "SINGAPORE: Web log shuts down after government threat of legal action"

There is one percivable inaccuracy: AcidFlask is referred to as "formerly a scholarship student through the agency [=A*Star]", which is factually wrong. AcidFlask is a former scholar with PSC. Gilbert Koh's closing of SLMJD also made mention.

Anyway, Singapore Ink has the extended lowdown on the ST and TODAY articles.

(0950 hrs May 7 -0400) Ok, a few quick thoughts on the two ST articles. Recall the little "textual issue" with one of the recent CNA reports (scroll down); the ST report actually contains both elements:

A*Star said yesterday that 23-year-old Chen Jiahao's web log (blog) comments struck at the core of the agency's integrity and he could face legal action if he fails to act. A*Star has the responsibility to protect its reputation and also that of Singapore,' said an agency spokesman. A*Star declined to reveal the exact nature of the statement on its lawyers' advice, as this would amount to repeating the libel. Such remarks could include direct accusations of bribery and misuse of public money, for example. (ST: "Blogger faces threat of law suit")

Note that the last bit is suitably qualified ("could include") and nicely ambiguous--does it come from the A*Star statement, or is it the reporter's attempt at explanation? My gut tells me that it's the former, especially given the earlier CNA report. A transcript of the press conference on A*Star's own website would be nice. Except for this bit, I think we are still pretty much blank as far as the precise source of A*Star's unhappiness is concerned. Unfortunately, though I was a fan of AcidFlask at Caustic.Soda, I only gave cursory glances to the scholarship/A*Star entries (not my sort of thing) and thus cannot even say things like "I recall seeing... don't recall seeing... anything about bribery... etc). But they did say this much:

While A*Star clarified yesterday that it did not agree with his opinions, it 'recognises and welcomes the value of a diversity of views' [context: the GPA thingy]. What it took issue with, it said, were other 'untrue and serious accusations against A*Star, its officers and other parties, which went way beyond fair comment'. 'We are puzzled as to why someone who had no relationship with A*Star has attacked us.' (ST: "Blogger faces threat of law suit")

So much for the continued murkiness concerning the exact contents of the alleged libel. (Ink has a nice bit about whether or not repeating a libel against oneself is an unwise thing to do.) What A*Star wants now, is "an unreserved and sincere apology":

They felt, for example, that the last line of his apology left an avenue open for him to make remarks about A*Star or Mr Yeo on other websites or media. What A*Star wants now, it said, is an unreserved apology, a retraction and a promise not to do it again. 'We're not itching to sue him. The ball is in his court now,' said the spokesman.

That's apparently the latest development. Grapevine is that the new demand was sent fairly recently--like 2 or 3 days before AcidFlask's exams (May 6) recent. Known timeline: AcidFlask was informed via email on Apr 22 that he can expect legal action over some of his entries on his blog unless he does something about it. He took down the site and put up the perceived-to-be-insincere apology Apr 25. So there is apparently a gap of more than one and a half weeks between the first apology and the recent demand (EDIT: that's as far as I know from publically available sources). Furthermore, according to the Today article, he has until Sunday May 8 to do so. Whatever the reasons for the delayed action, if there is one, I hope A*Star will be willing to at least grant AcidFlask a few more days--let him finish his exams first (May 14).

Interestingly, the TODAY article ends with this line:

As of press time, Mr Chen had not replied to Today's email queries.

That's referring to, among other things, the question of the Wendell Phillips quote prefixed to the "insincere" apology and whether he intends to apologise in a manner as demanded by A*Star. It seems that ST managed to get AcidFlask's answers before press time:

He explained that the [Wendell Phillips] quote merely reflected that this incident has reinforced his belief that he has to be responsible for what he says. As to whether he will apologise unreservedly, he replied: 'I do not know how to act until I am told exactly what I said was defamatory. 'I have told them I am having my exams now and it is important that I get to concentrate on my academic work so I hope they can give me an extension on the deadline.' (ST: "Blogger faces threat of law suit")

So obviously AcidFlask did managed to respond to someone about at least some of these questions. The only thing is: is there more to his response? And if so, is ST/TODAY/CNA willing to publish it, or will it be the blogosphere once again that has to fill that gap?

(1220 hrs May 7 -0400) Jeremy at Convex Set has a few words about the ST article about him...well, it amuses him greatly

(1620 hrs May 7 -0400) Heard on the grapevine about these two and a friend kindly emailed the URLs to me. They are both about Philip Yeo the person. Make for an...interesting read:

Electric TNP (May 8), "Meet a larger-than-life public service boss: White knight, Black knight--A*Star chairman Philip Yeo creates & sustains Singapore's only PhD scholarships, A tought-talking maverick, he also names and shames scholars who break bonds", by Tan Ooi Boon

Electric TNP (May 8), "Philip Yeo on A*Star scholars: Forget wimps, I prefer women", by Tan Ooi Boon

A quotable from the first article:

His sharp intellect brooks no nonsense. But he appreciates honesty. Tell him that he is unreasonable or harsh and, instead of being angry, he may surprise you by declaring that he doesn't care two hoots what you think of him.

But make no mistake, he takes umbrage if someone tries to attack what he labours hard over. Then the man with a genial twinkle in his eye will turn fiery.

'You can call me names,' he said. 'I don't care. Just don't criticise my work... I will bomb you flat. (emphasis in the original)

Illuminating it is, that last bit. Anyway, you can read them for yourselves.

(2035 hrs May 7 -0400) An anonymous reader kindly left a comment with a link to the ongoing discussion on Sammyboy.com's, where the discussion of the TNP articles is...colorful, as befitting Sammyboy.com.

(0705 hrs May 8 -0400) Wandie does some basic math. | The serialdeviant expresses some opinions (warning: language) | (0800 hrs May 8 -0400) And over at the Grilled Geckos, someone is talking about a "band of bloggers" | (0810 hrs May 8 -0400) Votre Coeur succumbs to gatemania | (1005 hrs May 8 -0400) Angeline: "This blog is political, because it is personal". | Oikono has a few words, and points to something of possible interest happening down under.

update: (1540 hrs May 8 -0400) The story has made the pages of the Financial Times (May 8), "Singapore threatens to sue internet dissenter", by John Burton in Singapore (hat tip Wows by email). As far as I can tell, however, it does not contain anything that readers of this blog would not have already seen in one form or other before. For the most part a combination of the RSF and CPJ articles, which also explains the specific spin of the :

A threatened libel suit against a blogger by a Singapore government agency has raised concerns among international press freedom groups that the city-state might be cracking down against dissent on the internet...

Developing...

update: (1645 hrs May 8 -0400) More blogosphere reactions: SarongPartyFrens thinks that it is self-explanatory and hopes someone will take some positive action. | Randy says "I told you so" (not his exact words) and links to an 2004 entry in Myrick. | The VR-Zone Hardware Forum wants a piece of the action.

update: (1820 hrs May 8 -0400) Singapore Ink has put up some comments on the TNP articles, and much more on the general issues, and with that, I'm will be out of action for a while (see newest post on this blog)

[Technorati: singapore, blogosphere]