Real or not real? That is the question.

Article: Reality TV gets dose of reality
Category: Entertainment
Source: The New Paper, 25 Aug 2007

Article Transcript:

They can be rude, crude and controversial.
These are what keep viewers returning to their TV sets week after week.
But reality TV shows' very success may eventually be their downfall.
Yesterday, China said it has banned TV shows abotu cosmetic surgery and sex changes.
Meanwhile, a report by an Australian media regulator has called for a ban on reality TV shows that present participants in a highly demeaning manner.
In the UK, Channel 4 has decided to stop airing its highly-rated - and highly-controversial - Celebrity Big Brother from next year.
China's watchdog singled out Guangdong show A Date With Beauty, which aired plastic surgery live. The series was said to be "bloody" and "vulgar".
The State Administration of Radio, Film and Television (Sarft) said on its website that it had banned "shows about cosmetic surgery, sex changes that involve public participation".
Guangdong TV was accused of violating the privacy of participants by airing operations such as breast implants and liposuction.
Earlier this month, Sarft banned Chongqing Braodcasting Group's talent show, The First Time I Was Touched. The watchdog called the show coarse and lacking in artistic standards.
One episode had a contestant staging a bizarre gift-giving stunt, obtaining a ring from one judge and giving it to another, then calling the second judge "stupid".
In Australia, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (Acma) called for a ban following a notorious incident on Ten Network's Big Brother programme last year.
Two male contestants were thrown off last July after footage appeared one of them apparently rubbing his crotch in a female contestant's face. While the scene was not shown on TV, it was streamed live on the Big Brother website.
The Acma report recommends that changes be made to the Commercial Television Industry Code of Practice that "prohibits the broadcast of material presenting participants in reality television in a highly demeaning or exploitative manner."
Britain's Celebrity Big Brother will be axed next year as part of Channel 4's major programme shake-up, reported Guardian. The programme drew a record 54,000 complaints from viewers after at the allegedly racist bullying of Indian housemate Shilpa Shetty.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Response:
One of the most interesting yet controversial concepts that has ever been brought to the world of the goggle-box, reality television is, safe to say, one of the biggest hits in the world today. It started off with reality game shows like Survivor, but in almost no time at all has developed into a wild variety of shows that have both stunned and pleased the general public. Guangdong show "A Date With Beauty", which airs patients' plastic surgeries live, is a prime example of this. People all around the world have always questioned the validity of reality tv and with so many of these ridiculous new shows appearing everyday, the problem is only getting worse.

Reality TV today seems to sacrifice quality for quantity; so many shows are produced daily, yet most of them are really not very appealing. In fact, even boring reality TV shows are becoming rarer by the day, for the latest shows seem to be more of a tick-off than anything else; frankly I would rather watch soap opera than see people go through the vomit-inducing process of plastic surgery.

Yet, are these "crackdowns" by reality TV watchdogs really the best way to settle the problem? Even if the shows are starting to get more controversial by the day, it is termed "reality" tv for a reason isn't it? If authorities are going to ban whatever they feel is "too inappropriate to be screened on television", or whatever they think can have a "negative influence" on the general public, what is going to differentiate Reality TV from the common drama sequels we see on TV?

Indeed, mindless shows that are controversial for the sake of being controversial should be taken action against, but what makes reality TV so special is the added level of meaning that they have in comparison with drama sequels; "Happily ever after" stories never teach us anything that we can truly apply to real-life scenarios. I as a teenager may not be mature enough to understand the true seriousness of the issue, and may not have watched enough programmes to know exactly how ridiculous reality tv is getting these days, but I am strongly of the opinion that instead of restricting the screening of these shows, we should instead work towards educating people about the right and wrong things they should take away from the programmes.

Reality TV opens our eyes, hearts and minds to the world around us, making us realise how small the little "world" we live in really is, thus imposing strict restrictions on it would really defeat its entire purpose. Granted, some of the content in these shows many not exactly be "good" for the public, but at the very end of the day, shouldn't we be rational enough to differentiate between right and wrong, and decide (for ourselves) what lessons we choose to take away from whatever we see on tv? Kids, one might then argue, will not be rational enough to differentiate right and wrong. Well, what are parents for?

(504 words)

Nothing more valuable than experience

Article: The Elderly CAN (not need) Help

Category: Social Issues
Source: The New Paper on Sunday, Aug 19, 2007

Article Transcript:

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong is expected to touch on ageing and retiring in his National Day Rally Speech. Here's Sylvia Toh Paik Choo's take on the issues.

I was 19 when Singapore was born as a republic in 1965.
I had sold my first article (to Her World for $40) on the perils and foibles of being a teenager.
Now it is 2007, our city state is 42 and my subject is ageing and retiring
Did I see this coming? Of course not. I thought one of the beatles would marry me and we'd make music together forever in Monaco. Lucky moi.
Singapore is poised to be the Monaco of the east with the F1 GP and the IRs imminent. And two of the fab four have permanently retired to join Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds.
This evening - with Help! playing softly in the background in my case - we the citizens of Singapore will be all ears as Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong delivers the most important political speech of the year, the National Day Rally biggie.
This NDR speech will particularly impact young and old; no guesses, one of its key thrusts will be about retiring and ageing in Singapore.
In other words, the Ah-Kong-Ah-Ma boom.
Or. How I Stopped Working (at 62) and became an Economic Burden
Here's a simplistic example:

Take a workplace like say the Istana. If MM Lee Kuan Yew and SM Goh Chok Tong were to quit gainful employment, it would leave PM Lee the one active person to support two inactive ones.
(Japan's future painful scenario has two working-age people for each retired one, Singapore's projection for 2020 is one-in-five above 60)
MM Lee and SM Goh are two of Singapore's most valuable assets in a country which as far as I can see worships youth. Take a weekday walk in the malls for confirmation.
Bright Young Things?
But look around you, most things of import have been invented or created by the not-so young. From rock 'n' roll, sex, drugs - okay not the finest example - to Apple, Java, iPod, iTunes, music, fashion, pop culture, Sun Microsystems, attitude.
Now that generation is no longer hip - hip replacements notwithstanding - what do we do with them, the greying dilemma?
From a Hollywood experience perspective, there's always the Soylent Green solution. Transform the elderly into bio-fuel. Think of the environment. Think of the factory jobs. Aiyoh, just joking only lah you!
Another option, deport the aged to retirement camps, for instance on Hainan Island. Picture the booming business in building these Club Meds (short for Club Medical). Manpower would be cheap, even with a little CPF you could lead a VIP rest-of-your-life.
And prepare for the Silver Revolution. This majority is unlikely to be silent. We are called Baby Boomers because our voice will boom; we gave birth to Attitude with a capital A. We won't go quietly. A little slower maybe, shaking the stick.
On a mature and more basic note, with our fecundity rate one of the lowest in the world, the elderly need to be kept in their jobs longer.
However fresh and dynamic for years in Kent Ridge have made you, you can't beat experience when it comes to the skills of surviving as a red dot in a large and tough world.
Besides, we need the old folks, or who's going to babysit the stories of early Singapore?
If you have read this far - without shortcutting paragraphs - thank you. It means I still have my job for the rest of today.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Response:
It happens all the time in Singapore. Bosses ignoring the contributions that older workers have made to their company and firing them just because they think that "age has caught up with them", and they are no longer "capable enough" to contribute to our nation's economy.

It almost seems like eugenics, the way the world functions nowadays. Age has never been an indication of competency, and it never should be. That is why such a negative attitude towards the aged of our society is wrong. We may have never realised it, but the young generation can never survive without the wealth of wisdom and experience the older generation has to offer us.

Sylvia Toh brought up two major contributions of the old folk to the youth of today. Firstly, they are the ones who keep many of our cultures and past traditions alive. Chinese New Year in the past used to be a grand event where people dressed in bright red traditional outfits would pray to their ancestors and have a reunion dinner with their family where the married would give red packets to the young and the young would give mandarin oranges as a gift of prosperity to the elderly. Such events are the very epitemy of the Chinese race, yet many today do not even bother to celebrate the occasion anymore, choosing instead to use the holiday to rest or hang out with friends. Without the old folks to inculcate in the youth a sense of pride and belonging towards their own culture, we could very well see a major cultural dilution in the people of today.

Secondly, the older generation possesses a huge wealth of experience that the younger generation can learn alot from. Having lived for so many years and having been through all the times of hardship that our nation had faced before we became the prosperous country we are today, the elderly carry with them valuable lessons from the past that we must never overlook. And who's to say the elderly are unable to contribute greatly to our economy, if they were the ones who had worked so hard to bring so many of us youth to where we are today?

That is precisely why we should treat the elderly as equals. No, in fact we should respect them as our superiors, for without the amazing contributions and hard work they had put into developing the tiny fishing village Singapore used to be in the past, we the young generation would not even be where we are today. There's only one word to describe the way the elderly are treated these days. Cruel. And although I am only a teenager who might not know enough about the world to understand what it takes for someone to be considered a "competent" or "capable" person, I strongly feel that the elderly of today should be given more opportunities to play their part in the community and earn themselves a decent living.

That's what meritocracy is about, after all.

(502 words)

Burnt to dust, at our own hands.

Article: Global Warming: 4 possible scenarios
Category: Environmental Issues
Source: Straits Times Forum, May 15, 2007

Link to Online Version

Eugene Tay Tse Chuan, a Straits Times reader, believes that there are four possible scenarios to which global warming can impact our world, thus he writes in to the ST forum to express his views. In Mr Tay’s opinion, our world will either face a “Happily ever after” scenario, where there is no global warming and prevention measures weren’t wasted on it, a “Pat on the back” scenario where there is global warming, but early action was taken, a “No regrets” scenario, where there is no global warming but a lot of money was wasted on protection measures or a “Reap and Sow” scenario, where there is global warming, but no preventive action is taken.

The question remains. Which situation will actually happen in years to come?

Since global warming is an evident threat in our world today, we probably will not be able to achieve the “Happily Ever After” scenario any time soon. Yet, are we going to risk ending up in the “Reap and Sow” scenario for fear of wasting money on “useless plans to tackle climate change”? Many skeptics tend to claim that environmentalists are making mountains out of molehills, that the global warming problem issue isn’t really as bad as it seems to be, but is that really true? Yes, maybe people like Al Gore are making the situation seem more fatal than it really is, but at the end of the day, does it really matter? Why do we even need to wait till we are in trouble before we even make an attempt at saving ourselves from the dead? Even if our world was in a perfect condition, with no environmental problems whatsoever, does it hurt to put in that extra effort to take care of Mother Earth?

Alot of money might be wasted if the third scenario is met, but what’s it called “No regrets” for? In my opinion, this is precisely why we have been unable to settle the problem of global warming effectively, even after working at it for a very long time. The sheer audacity of regarding our personal wealth and well-being as more important than the health of our planet is simply shocking. Yet I can’t say I’m not guilty of this. We litter because we are lazy to find a bin, we drive because we are too lazy to take public transport “tiring”, and when warned about the potential harm of our actions, we conveniently say, “I’m just one person, what can I do?”

I know I may sound like some overly passionate environmentalist who is desperately trying to convince each and every one of you to “Save Mother Earth”, but the truth is, our selfish and uncaring behaviour is simply unacceptable.

Mother Earth has provided for us all, bringing each and every single one of us to where we are today. So how can we possibly forsake her and leave her to perish just because of our own selfish needs? Taking care of our environment is something that we should be motivated to do all the time, regardless of the state it is in. So why the big (not to mention unnecessary) debate on whether our planet is really on the path to doom? If we continue arguing over such a trivial matter without taking any action, our planet will probably be burnt to dust before we even decide to do anything about it. I may not be extremely well-read on global warming, and I may not be able to fully understand the situation at hand, but I strongly believe that if there ever comes a day where our planet really perishes due to global warming, we will have no one to blame but ourselves.


(503 words)

Why bother with a surname?

Article: Looking for Singapore’s Next Leader
Category: Political Issues
Source: WeekendToday, May 5-6, 2007; http://www.todayonline.com/articles/186820.asp

Summary: Since our nation’s independence in 1965, Singapore has seen a total of three powerful and influential figureheads leading our nation’s government. Mr Lee Kuan Yew, Mr Goh Chok Tong and Mr Lee Hsien Loong, our present Prime Minister, have no doubt done well in transforming Singapore from the fishing village of the past to the flourishing nation state we are today. The question now is, who will the baton be passed on to in the decades to come, when Mr Lee Hsien Loong steps down as Prime Minister?

The question we have to ask ourselves is, “What do we want in a leader?”

We first have to consider whether the person is able to lead our nation to greater heights, whether economically, politically or otherwise. A prime example would be Mr Lee Kuan Yew, who (in his 31 year reign as Prime Minister) had almost single-handedly brought Singapore to where we are today. Yet many people fail to recognise this, and instead critique Mr Lee’s methods of leadership. Mr Lee may seem somewhat elitist, and he does go all out to get rid of any opposition, but does that make him any less the influential leader that he is?

In my opinion, that is Singapore’s biggest problem when it comes to politics. Instead of looking at the big picture, many tend to nit-pick on minor issues. So what if Mr Lee made Chee Soon Juan bankrupt? So what if the PAP refuses to fund the development of Potong Pasir? Yes, these controversial methods are questionable, but the important thing is, we continue to have a strong government that strives to ensure our nation’s stability. Ask any Singaporean whether he would trust an opposition party to take over what the PAP has done for us in the past 40 years, and he would probably find it very hard to say yes, even if strongly anti-PAP in his views.

After PAP’s hegemony for the past decades, many Singaporeans have become apathetic to the politics of our country, bored with what we term an "uninteresting" one-party system. Well look at Taiwan's politics. Definitely interesting, but are they nearly half as stable as Singapore? I strongly believe that we as Singaporeans should learn to move away from PAP or Anti-PAP points-of-view, looking at figureheads like Mr Lee as the Prime Minister rather than the leader of PAP. Yes, PAP does have controversial methods of achieving political dominance, but we can never deny that what the PAP has done for Singapore can never be erased from the annals of our history. Thus, I believe that we should learn to accept the PAP for who they are, and look at politics from a more objective point-of-view.

As I am still young and have not received much exposure to politics, I may not be able to fully understand all the issues regarding the governing of a nation. Yet, I believe that when our next Prime Minister is sworn in, we should look at more important factors like whether he is capable of helping our country flourish or whether he is concerned for the needs of his people. Mr Goh and both Mr Lees have all had their different ways of government, and we as Singaporean citizens should not nit-pick on minor issues, but rather respect and acknowledge their contributions towards the development of our nation.

As long as the leader in 10 years to come is capable of building a better Singapore for everyone, why should we even bother with his surname or the party he is from?

(503 words)

Terrorism in Singapore

Article: DPM warns of radical ideas being spread through Internet
Category: Societal Issues
Source: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/261659/1/.html
Date: 2nd March 2007

Summary: Deputy Prime Minister Wong Kan Seng has warned that a new terror phenomenon has emerged and the internet age is to blame. Besides about 6,000 websites with pro-terrorist ideas, there are also websites which teach everything from dismantling weapons to making a homemade bomb, leading to the worry that young singaporeans would be wrongly exposed to terrorist ideas.

I find this problem quite worrying, for it is easy to access information on the Internet, and yet it is hard to completely shut down terrorist websites. Therefore I strongly agree with DPM Wong that a more effective method of preventing terrorist manifestations in Singapore would be to go online and counter such extremist propaganda. When young Singaporeans hear the serious consequences of terrorism from the government itself, they would most likely be inclined to stop any form of influence terrorist propaganda might have been having on them.

Education definitely has a huge role to play. Singaporean youths must be able to understand the severity of terrorism and why they should not subscribe to the radical ideas of terror organisations. Having speakers visiting schools or setting up websites to educate teenagers about the threat of terrorism could help reduce the influence of terrorism among our youth today.

If one were to view this problem from a different perspective, one could say that teens breed such radical ideas due to a lack of multi-racialism. As Singaporean youths did not live through the tough times of racial and religious disorder in our country a few decades ago, they fail to understand the importance of multi-racialism towards the functioning and survival of Singapore as a whole. Personally I have also found it hard to understand the true severity of racial disputes as I have never witnessed any major inter-racial disputes in my life, so I have to be constantly reminded about how Singapore would fall without inter-racial harmony both by the wiser older generation of our country and by the teaching of past events in school. That is the step the Singapore government has to take in order to prevent young Singaporeans like myself from developing incorrect and inappropriate extremist ideas.

Some may believe that one day we would be able to completely rid our world of terrorism, as we are constantly taking a step closer towards eradicating them, having captured important figureheads like Saddam Hussein and working hard towards the eventual capture of the man at the top of it all, Osama bin Laden. Yet I personally feel that even if he were captured and killed, terrorists would still be able to worship a new leader and continue spreading their influence around the world.

In fact, as technology advances, terrorists would not only be able to spread their influence more quickly, but would also be able to carry out more terrifying and unpreventable misdeeds on the human race. We can never completely eradicate the terrorists themselves, yet one thing we can surely do, is stop their influence. I may be assuming that education will receive a positive response from the Singaporean youths, and the innocent me may be careless in saying that the influence of terrorists can be completely stopped, but I strongly feel that if everyone remains well-informed, working hand-in-hand in the fight against terrorism, we would still eventually be able to bring world peace to this planet we call home.

(500 words)

Teen Addiction to Gaming

Article: Confessions of an ex-gaming junkie
Category: Issues regarding teenagers
Source: The Sunday Times, February 11 2007

Summary: Benjamin Toh, a 17-year old boy from top boys' school, was active in school until he became addicted to MapleStory, an online fantasy game. He spent hours playing the game, skipping his meals, sacrificing his sleep, playing for up to 20 hours a day and neglecting his studies to the extent that he had to be retained in Secondary 3. However he has since turned over a new leaf, restricting himself to 2-3 hours of gaming a day and working hard to regain what he has lost due to his over-indulgence in the virtual world. He tells reporter Tessa Wong what went wrong.

An increasing number of teenagers in our society today are getting hooked to online gaming, neglecting their studies and some even ruining their future, which makes me wonder what could possibly cause such extreme addiction to gaming.

The simplest reason would be the high and rapidly advancing level of technology in our world today, which allows for the production of mind-blowing games with brilliant graphics and exciting gameplay that teens have every reason to fall in love with today.

Another important cause of gaming addiction would definitely be stress. As society becomes more affluent, life becomes more challenging. Teenagers today are faced with a tougher education system and increasing expectations from the people around them, causing a huge amount of stress. Like Benjamin I am also a student, and as such I can understand the position people like him are in. Yet, I feel that the reason for him being able to play for 20 hours on end is something else altogether, and is perhaps one of the more serious causes of gaming addiction.

As teenagers our parents play a vital role in our lives. We need them both to love us and to point out the right paths in life to us. Many of these teens who are addicted to online gaming come from broken families, or have parents who aren't there for them when they truly need them. Without parental love teens feel unwanted, and can even develop a sense of hatred towards their parents such that they indulge themselves in the virtual world just to avoid facing them at home. Without parental guidance, teens tend to take up the wrong paths in life, going for what they enjoy without having someone wiser to teach them what is truly right. Therefore I believe that it is this lack of parental influence that is the main and most serious cause of gaming addiction in teens.

As teens assume their virtual identities they enter a world where they live among their friends, free to express themselves and ungoverned by the strict authority and high expectations they face in the real world, as such an addiction is developed, not to the game itself, but to its purpose as a place where they can avoid the problems they face in life.

Privileged to have parents who care for me and never fail to guide me along the right paths in my life, I may not truly understand the situation these teens are in. Here I am attributing the lack of parental influence as the main cause of teens to take the wrong paths in their lives, yet I may not understand how some parents have tried their very best to help their kids, but to no avail. Still, I strongly believe that as long as both the teens and their parents are willing to work hand in hand, they can eventually break free of their addiction to online gaming and work towards building a better future for themselves, just like Benjamin did.

(500 words)

Welcome

From this day forth, this blog will be where I give my two cents worth of opinions on the issues concerning our world today.

Mind you, this blog is a graded assignment, so while I try my very best to be politically correct, I hope you will do your part by saying "NO!" to spamming(mimics action of people on say no to drugs brochures), even though you may(in complete disagreement with the way I view this world) see me as a fool; For even the darndest of fools, has his story to tell.