The General Issue

Censorship can never be justified. Do you agree?

2007-05-19T04:59:00.000-07:00

Before i state my stand and reasoning, let me define the meanings of censorship and justified. Censorship is defined as deleting part of publications or correspondence or theatrical performances, OR counterintelligence achieved by banning or deleting any information of value to the enemy. Justified has the meaning of showing to be reasonable. So, the question is actually talking about whether deleting or banning any information is reasonable or acceptable.

From what i feel, censorship should not be justified. I do not agree with the motion. For example, if the government have decided to ban all the songs containing vulgar words, or ban movies which contain sexual contents, then we will not be able to listen different variety of songs, or even watch movie such as Scary Movie 4, I Am Not Stupid, Harry Potter etc. Then, our life will be very dull and boring. Furthermore, famous artists such as Avril Lavigne, Akon and even Justin Timberlake will not exist in the music industry due to the fact that their songs are favourable among the teenagers. The music and movie industry will not be able to survive and the varieties will become limited. So, why should censorship be justified?

Moreover, it is the responsibility for parents to teach their children from young what is right and what is wrong. If we allow censorship to happen in Singapore, these children will not be able to practice differentiating what is correct or incorrect. It will be difficult for them to survive in the real society. These children will not be able to understand and gain experience from their mistakes. Furthermore, the younger generation, no matter what, is going to lead the country one day. Obviously, we do not want our country to collapse in the hand of these people. So, i feel that, censorship can never be justified.

The problem with the modern media is that they do not have a sense of social justice. Do You Agree?

2007-05-15T22:41:00.000-07:00

I do agree to the fact that the modern media is that they do not have a sense of social justice. The way that the reporters have actually reported on the newspaper has further proven this motion. Some of the articles concerning about a certain particular case in the newspaper have portrayed a bad impression on the accusation side, even before the verdict is even announced. For example, the NKF case. Before the case has even started, several newspaper reports had actually been reported, which were of a disadvantage to the person who is accused. In this case, he is Durai.
Newspapers are easily accessible to public, hence people will be able to buy it easily at newspaper stand. I feel that the reporters had actually make used of the opportunity to make money, by picking out as many faults that Mr. Durai has made as possible, in order to bring down his portfolio. Moreover, they did not even bother to care about the positive things that he had actually done. This, i feel, that it was rather unfair to him, as his sentence was so-called 'judged' by not only the reporters, but also the people who had read the articles.
Another case is the accusation of Paris Hilton, whereby she was accused of drink driving. Celebrity heiress Paris Hilton has been jailed for 45 days after being found guilty of violating her probation for a drink-driving conviction. However, the newspaper had published about her case. Furthermore, some newspapers report did mention that Paris Hilton is actually used as an example to warn all those people out there who drink-drive not to do so. Who do the reporters think they are? Are they juries? Do they have the rights to judge whether 1 is right or wrong? The way that newspaper created their articles had caused the Paris Hilton's portfolio to be totally destroyed. Whatever records that she had set, whatever number song that she had produced are voided. I felt that, mainly the reason why the newspaper did massive reports and articles about her is to make money. There are lots of Paris Hilton's supporters out there who are eagerly waiting to the verdict of her case.
Mone, is what i felt that every press company wanted to achieve. So, that is why the problem with the modern media of not having a sense of social justice exists.

The media is corrupting our society. Do you agree?

2007-05-08T23:54:00.000-07:00

I do agree to the fact that the media is corrupting our society. In the media industry in Singapore, television seems to be the most influential medium. TV dramas, especially locally produce in Singapore, do contain certain scene which are 'unhealthy' to children who have watched them. Children tends to be intrigued by what the artists are doing and hence will be keen to learn and follow. Children, generally, are the once that is easy to be influenced. Due to their lack of maturity, they are unable to differentiate what is right and what is wrong, hence they will assume that whatever things that the artists do is right. Due to that, they follow whatever the artists do.
In several other countries, adults-related programmes, for instance porn, are shown after 12 midnight. Some of the children in these countries do stay up late at night. Once they switched on the TV and start watching this adults-related programmes, they will easily be either addicted or become influenced by that. Children, supposedly, are not even allowed to watch this kind of programme. If these children pick up the bad habit of doing so, it will not be good for them when they have grown up.
The fastest way to change the direction of a nation is to capture the minds of its youth. By media influence, it can be done. However, responsible parents must now directly supervise activities which were previously found to be neutral in content for fear that objectionable material might be slipped in. This will prevent children from heading towards the wrong direction when young.
Furthurmore, i feel that it is inappropriate and immoral to lure innocent children using neutral program content, only to change the message once you have them hooked. This practice is no less horrific than drug pushing or pedophilia, and it should be considered no less of a criminal act.

Related links : http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/nightwaves/pip/dz8mj/

Virginia Incident - Is Gun Control a solution to reduce crime rate?

2007-05-02T04:55:00.000-07:00

In my opinion, i do feel that imposing gun control can reduce the crime rate in America. Although the article states that in the decade, since England have banned all private possessions of handguns, the number of gun crimes rate have gone up sharply, i do feel that it might be necessary to still impose this law. This is because i feel that by imposing the law, no one will be allowed to hold or purchase a gun for themselves, hence the gun crimes rates could have gone down. What i feel is that, when England imposed the law, a lot of the citizens might still have consumption of guns in their hand, hence these people will seize the opportunity to actually assault and abuse. So, i feel that the England government must also take action. That means, they must go around the country confiscating guns from the citizens.

We know that gun plays an important role in self-defense. However, if you think carefully, should the government restrict the consumption of guns, each and every people will not have a gun in their hand. It will be a lot more safer to walk on the street without the need to arm oneself. Some students in Europe do actually bring guns to school, for self-defense. However, this can be very risky. Some students do not really practice self-control, especially guys. If there are very agitated about certain things in school or they just go out of mind, they will just take out the gun and start shooting people. Tragedy occurs.

The government in Singapore has imposed stringent laws on the consumption of gun. Each of us do not have a gun in our hand and hence we feel much more safer as compared to if each and every one of us have a gun in our hand. It will be like, no matter where we go, we do not feel very comfortable. Once a quarrel sparkles, massive gun fight will occur and a lot of people will be injured or dead. If the gun crimes rates in Singapore is equivalent to the United States, i am sure that a portion of the Singapore's population will disappear.

However, it is not really a bad thing to have a gun in our hand, if it is used appropriately. All the men in Singapore will get a chance to learn how to use a rifle. The purpose of it is to protect our small country against the enemies. I feel that, Singaporeans should acquire some knowledge in warfares. If not, Singaporeans will not be prepared to face the battle and hence very easy to be conquered by other countries.

Finally, i still think that gun control is a solution to reduce crime rate.

Nowadays, the mass media do not report the news; they make the news. Discuss this with references to recent events.

2007-04-24T08:51:00.000-07:00

From my point of view, i do feel that the mass media do not report the news, however they exactly made the news. Their motive of doing so is to influence other people's mind. Mass media report news in order to earn money. However sometimes, reporting news might not enable them to maximise profits, hence, they create news.

Reports about celebrity is one of the example of how the press create news in order to earn money. As this celebrity are famous, people tend to follow about their life and well-being. Hence, the press has grasp hold of the opportunity to actually create news. The news about Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt, as you all know, are one of the news that the readers will love to follow. Usually, in order to earn money, the press has to try to produce the news as fast as possible so that it will be reached to the target audience in a fastest possible way. As a result, most of the reports are not reliable.

Politics is another example of how the press creates the news. In the recent years, the mass media usually has the power of overthrown a government by propagandizing the citizens about the life. This is because the media is widely connected to the people in the countries, or even around the world. The influence of the media is very impactful, leading to the extend of even causing the president to lose power. The media has no respect for democracy, instead, they just want to earn money. From the source that i have provided, there are the examples of how trustworthy can a news report be. It may seem reliable, however, we might not know whether the press has re-modified into their own version in order to trick the readers.

In conclusion, i feel that the mass media do not really rather report the news, instead, they actually create news.

Source :
http://search.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?q=Brad+Pitt&scope=all&edition=i&tab=ns&recipe=all

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6586883.stm

“YouTube has no ethics, it's been created for the sole purpose of entertainment and money.” Do you agree?

2007-04-11T06:56:00.000-07:00

YouTube has no ethics, it's been created for the sole purpose of entertainment and money.” Do you agree?

The founders of youtube created youtube with the intention of providing a video sharing service to the world free of charge as there weren’t such services in the past, so in short, it was created for the sole purpose of entertainment and they had no intention of making money from it in the 1st place.

I do agree to the stand. Youtube was an instant hit n it became known worldwide as it was the only website with that allows people to share videos so easily thus people upload all sorts of videos from anime to movies to TV series n even home made videos just for entertainment. Moreover, people upload their videos in order to allow other people to comment on how good the video is. This goes to show that youtube is very popular around the globe because of the fact that videos are being uploaded from different countries. People get to learn more about other people’s cultures and information which they have not discovered yet.

However, when youtube became very successful after a period of time, there is a serious problem. Web giant, Google, have decided to buy over youtube as they felt that it was profitable. From that point onwards, youtube became more of a tool for making money instead of its original purpose of entertainment which causes severe copyright problems. Advertisements started to appear on youtube, when google started making use of copyrighted videos to make money instead of the sole purpose of entertainment, many companies were not happy with the fact that their precious hard work are being aired on the net for free and google is earning money from the videos instead of the respective companies. This shows that youtube doesn’t care about copyright laws and in a way supporting piracy, not showing any ethics at all.

In conclusion, when youtube was first created, it was just for solely for entertainment and no profits were made from the videos, and no ethics were in question as there wasn’t any money involved. However, once google took over and used the videos to make money, the focus was more on money rather than entertainment without taking into consideration the consequence of infringing copyright law.

"teenage years are the best years of one's life" Do You Agree?

2007-04-04T15:06:00.000-07:00

I do agree that teenage years are the best years of one's life. Teenagers face lesser amount of pressure as compared to adults though they may face stressful periods occasionally, such as studying for examinations. Also, they do not have to take up the responsibility of supporting their families; therefore they do not have to worry about monetary issues at all. It is also during the teenage years that one will be able to make more friends and establish a lifelong friendship with them.
As compared to adults, teenagers face less pressure. They are not subjected to the harsh reality and in the working world, office politicking are not uncommon. Many adults find themselves competing with one another, hoping to outshine others for their own benefits, such as getting a pay raise or promotion. However, teenagers do not face such a situation as most of them have a rather naïve mindset and mentality given their age. They are given the freedom to explore and discover instead of conforming to fixed rules, which is found in typical office settings. Therefore, it is a no doubt that teenage years are the best years in one’s life as teenagers do not have to cope with high level of stress.

Next, teenagers lead a more carefree life and do not have as much worries as an adult does. For instance, the burden of supporting the family does not lie on them. Most of the time, their parents are the ones taking charge of financial issues, whether it is paying the bills or taxes. On top of that, they also receive allowance from their parents and a roof over their head. Teenagers have the luxury to hang outside and enjoy as they are not bounded by any commitments to their families. They are also willing to try out daring activities only during their teenage years as most people become self conscious when they grow older. Given that teenagers do not face as much constraints and worries, the teenage years are definitely the most enjoyable in one’s life.

Teenagers tend to have a wider social circle during their youthful days. They make friends more easily and come together because they have the same interests. Teenagers often find themselves dependable on friends during periods when they are down or depress. To most of them, friends are the next greatest companions who come after their own families. It is more difficult to make more friends as one gets older, and even harder to find those who truly understand you for who you are. An adult can feel isolated because of the environment that he or she is in, but definitely not the case for a teenager. It may be easier for teenagers to express their thoughts to friends without worrying about them forming opinions. Thus, with the above factor, I would agree that teenage years are the best years in one’s life.

In conclusion, teenage years are the best years in one’s life as the amount of stress that teenagers faced is minimal. At the same time, teenagers are allowed to explore new things themselves and be creative at the same time. A lifelong friend known since teenage days will definitely have an impact in one’s life because he or she will be the one whom you share your joy and woes to.

Do you think professional parenting is the way to go for Singapore?

2007-02-23T21:22:00.000-08:00

In my opinion, i feel that professional parenting is a way to go for Singapore. Firstly, there have been an increase working mothers in these year and professional parenting comes in when the children are still young to take care of themselves. Working mothers might not have the luxury of time to actually take care of their children, hence professional parenting comes in handy to take care of the children. More parents have now sent their children to childcare centres as they find it hard to take care of their own children due to their busy schedule. Also nowadays, businesses and works require people to travel from one place to another, so these parents can't possibly take their children along as it will be very troublesome. Parents will always think that they go to work is for the best for their children. Some parents might not know how to take care of their children well, this is where professional parenting will help. Who can they rely on for parenting advice if there are no professional parenting coaches? Even though these parents might have the time to do so, they might not be able to handle their mischievous and naughty childrens at home, that is how supernanny can come in to help them to solve these problem. Therefore, professional parenting is important.
However on the other hand, i feel that professional parenting is not a way to go for Singapore. I feel that the babysitters and the biological parents might have different ways of teaching, so sometimes there might be several things that the biological parents have taught to their children are different from what the babysitters or the professional parents have taught them. Moreover, the love and care from the babysitters are not that strong compared to the of love by the biological parents.The biological parents are the only ones that a child can communicate better and feel the sense of love and care with. If all of the parents are to send their kids under professional parenting, the children in the whole of Singapore will not be able to experience true love that only biological parents have. Some biologcal parents might have these kind of thought : "Do we want to leave our child with a babysitter/maid for 12 hours a day?" Well, certainly not. It can be quite risky to leave a child with a babysitter for a long time. To be save better than sorry, biological parents will have to look after the kids themselves.
Professional Parenting has its pros and the cons. However overall, i feel that it is not wise for professional parenting being the way to go for Singapore.

February 21 - Online scam artists luring many with 'highly paid jobs' - ST

2007-02-21T01:46:00.000-08:00

I feel that internet is not really a safe place to find job after i have read carefully about the article. Scammers nowadays do make use of the internet to inappropriately earn fast money. Internet safety nowadays has became a question mark to society since after number of scamming incident involving money is on the rise. People nowadays do not seem to know the difference between real job offers and fake ones. People just simply love money(due to human nature). However sometimes, it is rather difficulty for a person to differentiate between fake and real offers. As the article has mentioned, those jobs offered to victim are jobs that either offer high salaries (which is rather ridiculous in figures) or skills that the person are not really professionalize in. These kind of jobs are most probably fake and nonsensical. I feel that when a person needs a job, he needs particularly is the money or the salaries. It does not make sense whereby a person has to pay in order tog et that particular job with high salaries. Also, another factor of :"fake" job offers is a substantial amount of spelling mistakes. Think logically about it, the employers must write the offer in a way such that people can understand what the job offer is all about, before they actually decide whether to accept or not. It is rather incredible for a British to actually wrote that offer with a lot of grammatical and spelling mistakes in it. The number of such cases have been increasing drastically over the past few years and we cannot afford it to continue rising further. I, therefore feel that the government will have to step in and take severe action against the offenders. Individuals must also play a part by keeping a look out fort his kind of 'fake' job offers and also compare to other 'real' job offers to know what is wrong with the fake one. Hence, i feel that we need to be aware of these kind of things occurring on us, so that we will not be the victim of the scam.

Accounting Body For Charities -ST

2007-02-21T01:37:00.000-08:00

I do agree about the government's decision to set up an accounting standards board. This will actually ensure the uniformity of practices across all charities. In the recent few year, people are beginning to feel more distrustful towards charity organisation as most of them do not really know the motives or purpose that particular charity organisation. Charity organisation in the recent years tend to portray the good side of it and hide the dark side of it. Hence, we, as a citizen, sometimes do not even know where the money that we have donated have gone to.The NKF saga, moreover, had decreased the trust of what people have on charity organisation. People are starting to think about the reliability of a charity organisation. Certainly, it has spoilt the reputation of charity organisation. This system will enable the government to control which activity is to be deemed as a charity. Not only that, the purpose of setting up this scheme is to enable singaporeans to know exactly about what is charity and how it functions, such that people will then regain their confidence on charity organisation again. The patients are always the victim, should anything goes wrong with the charity organisation. Hence, we should be more concerned about the patients if they are under this situation. Therefore, it is important for government to take further measures to ensure that the charity organisation run in a more acceptable and appropriate manner.

"The family plays a critical role in our society. Do you agree?"

2007-01-27T00:51:00.000-08:00

I do agree that the family plays a critical role in our society. A family, quote from Wikipedia, is defined as the "domestic group of people (or a number of domestic groups), typically affiliated by birth or marriage, or by analogous or comparable relationships — including domestic partnership, cohabitation, adoption, surname and (in some cases) ownership (as occurred in the Roman Empire)".In the society, family ties are those recognized as such by the law, or a similar normative system. Hence, the family plays a critical role in the societies nowadays.

Families plays a important role in nurturing the next generation. Socialisation is one of the role of the family that helps to contribute to the society. When I was just a small boy, I was being taught moral education at home. For instance, greeting the visitors when they step into the house. Parents do have a part to educate their own children. Under the influence of the family, we, who undergo these kind of education, will be able to become a righteous person in the future when we have grown up. Therefore, it is critical as it moulds the child when the child us young, so that the child will be able to survive independently from their parents when they have gone to work in the society. Children are more likely to be influence when they are young, as they will follow what they are told to do without knowing the reason. Can you imagine the world without families? It will be a chaotic world. Moral education also prevent the family members from doing things that are against the law, for examples, stealing, drugs addicting and etc. The way that the parents educating the child is differ from the way twenty to thirty years back. Probably thirty years back, the parents feel that caning their child might be the best way to teach the children but in modern times, the parents feel that caning is not the best way to educate their children. As we are always at home most of the time, the time spend with our family will be more, therefore the bondings between family members will be much closer.

Families serves as a purpose to provide accommodation,food and money for the children in education, entertainment and comfort. The children will be able to grow up peaceful without any bad childhood memories. The children will then feel the loved and wanted, as family becomes their strongest emotional bond to them. Some families, however, have children who are strongly abused and loathed by their parents. The family might then face consequences that they might not have expected. Children might run away from home. About 2 Years ago, there are simultaneous cases of children running away from their home in Singapore. What's even more scary, is the ages of the children. The ages of the children running away from their house have seem to became smaller and smaller. This can be due to the way that parents have treated their child, or media influences, or even more. Hence, parents have to now step in to manipulate their behaviour, such that these kind of incident will not happen again in Singapore. In the United States, sometimes, there are cases whereby students brought guns in school and cause injuries and death in schools. These reflects the ability of the parents to coach their students.

Finally, the crtical role of the family is to increase the country's population and birth way and that is, regulating sexual activities. Procreation is rather important as if you imagine, if the country has lesser birth rate, how is that particular country able to survive in the future? There will then be lesser local citizens that will help to defend the country. Procreation serves as a confirmation from the parents that they want to have a children, hence wanting to contribute to the country's population. One of a very good example is Singapore. Singapore is nowing heading towards aging population, which is rather critical. Therefore, in order to prevent that to happen, the government has actually announced the benefits and incentives of giving birth to a child. However, i do feel that parents should have the initiative of deciding whether to have a baby or not. If they choose to have a child, it goes to show that they have the ability to support and educate the child so that they will be able to contribute to the society.

Hence, i could conclude that families do serve as an important role, enabling Singapore to progress future to a greater height. Singapore will feel proud of the next generation.