Hasnor Hashim vs the Straits Times

OK there has been a lot said about the S$7,000 a month taxi driver story and it is interesting to finally hear from Hasnor Hashim. You can read a very good analysis of the situation here on another blog. Given how good the analysis is by our friend in Perth, I shall go on to analyse the implication of the case. I do feel for the guy, for this article here on Asia One does make him look really bad.

I have already given my initial analysis here: that the journalist and her editor was under pressure to deliver a feel good story about taxi drivers in Singapore. However, it has become clear that the story Maria Almenoar  wrote didn't reflect the facts accurately (and she is not taking any responsibility for her mistakes) - since we already have a good idea WHAT happened, I'd like to move beyond that and ask WHY it happened and HOW it could've happened.

What is the role of a journalist? 

Ms Almenoar is getting a lot of hateful comments on social media right now - some of them have even jumped to the conclusion that she is Filipino and have been spewing anti-Filipino racist hatred on Facebook. This angers and disgusts me so much - look here you Singaporeans, if you are angry with her for writing a misleading story, then direct your anger at her. If you are angry at the ST for being a shit newspaper, then direct your anger at ST. If you are angry with the PAP for letting in so many foreigners, then direct your anger directly at the PAP. Indeed, you should also be angry with all the Singaporean voters, the 60.14% who voted for the PAP - direct your anger at them! But you crossed the line when you turn your anger into such nasty anti-Filipino racist hatred - you have clearly lost the plot and the argument. I'm not pro-Pinoy per se, I'm just anti-racism and I hate it when people misdirect their anger! Here's the irony: she probably isn't even Filipino to begin with - her full name is Sharifa Maria Almenoar but for some reason she goes by Maria rather than Sharifa. Interestingly, this journalist has crossed swords with blogger Xiaxue back in 2006.

Allow me to introduce a new dimension into the equation: the editor. Now Ms Almenoar's article would be subject to the approval of her editor who would have every right to censor, edit and change her article prior to publication. I don't know how much editing her article was subject to - but I just wanted to remind you that there could've been someone else (or even two or more editors) involved in the picture who may be the one responsible for misrepresenting Hasnor Hashim. She most definitely isn't working alone, not whilst she is at SPH!

Ms Almenoar has an editor who sits behind the scenes, editing her articles. 

Let me give you an example of how this could work in practice. During the riots in London in 2011, I was interviewed by Alvina Soh of Mediacorp. When I actually saw the article, I nearly fell off my chair - she had completely pretty much ignored what I said in the interview and created the article she wanted, rather than based it on what I actually told her. The fact is, I was nowhere near the riots - I was merely following it on the news via the internet .  I even joked with my Singaporean friends, "if you know there's a riot, what do you do? Do you go and join in the fun, 去凑凑热闹, take pictures for your Facebook page? Or do you stay away and keep out of trouble? That's why I was not affected, duh." It was not like the whole of London descended into lawlessness and chaos - rather, the rioting was concentrated in some areas only. So as I spoke to her on the phone, I basically told her that I was not affected at all, I'm just watching it on the news, I am staying at home as I can work from home...

Then the conversation drifted - she asked me more general questions about what was happening in London (rather than what I was experiencing personally), so I then started retelling stories I had heard in the news about what was happening elsewhere in London. And guess what? Those were the quotes she used. Great. She didn't use any of my more nonchalant quotes about how I thought the situation wasn't too bad - nor was she interested in any of my analysis of why the riots are happening in the first place. She just wanted me to make London sound like hell on earth - the fact is, I never witnessed any of the rioting, yet somehow in the article, she made it sound as if I was a witness. Here's a basic rule about journalism 101: boring stories don't sell newspapers. Sensational stories make good reading. However, if I made a ridiculous claim like "Godzilla is attacking London" - then the onus is on the journalist to verify if what I said is indeed true, rather than just quote me as a witness.

Just to prove my point, allow me to tell you about Hurricane Sandy hitting New York. Now I have been in London when Hurricane Sandy swept through North-East USA. But imagine if you have not heard about it at all, I will tell you in a few sentences what happened based on what I have seen in the news - note how it can sound like a first person account.

"When Hurricane Sandy hit New York, not only was there heavy rains and high winds, but there was a huge storm surge. Many coastal areas experienced severe flooding and many homes were destroyed. A huge blackout hit lower Manhattan as the flooding got worse and many homes are still without electricity today. Power lines are down, many trees are blown over and public transport is struggling to get back to normal. Many of the people rendered homeless as a result of this storm are very worried as the weather is getting colder this week."

Am I a witness? Or am I just someone relaying second hand information I have obtained from the news?

Thus in the case of Hasnor Hashim - well, I don't doubt his honesty or his integrity. After all, when a journalist wants to interview you, one naturally feels flattered. It's natural, most people like their opinion to be heard and then they can go on Facebook and say, "hey check it out, I'm in the news." What we don't realize when we do that is how our opinions are then represented by the journalist who has to construct a story based on what information s/he has collected and interviews s/he has done. Perhaps he was a little bit naive in the kind of story he was involved in - what did he think he was getting himself into? What was he told? The onus, however, is on the journalist to verify her facts and make sure that her story is believable if she wants to retain her credibility.

As a blogger, I write what I want. I don't have an editor dictating or censoring my content and I am directly accountable to my readers. When I interview people for my blog, I try my best to transcribe everything as accurately as possible so as to allow them to tell their own story in their own words. This is probably the best way to allow my readers to find out about their opinions directly, without me filtering it with my writing style. I simply ask the right questions, the questions I think my readers will ask about the topic. Had Ms Almeonar allowed Mr Hashim to tell his story in his own words, maybe he wouldn't be this pissed off today over the handling of this episode.

Did Ms Almenoar put words in Mr Hashim's mouth? 

Hasnor Hashim didn't have a feel good story for Ms Almenoar - yes it is possible to earn S$7000 a month as a taxi driver in Singapore but the poor guy worked such ridiculously long hours that month and would probably never want to do it again (unless he absolutely has to). Was she under pressure from her editors to turn Hasnor Hashim into a feel good story? Perhaps. You may think that the decent thing to do now would be for her to fall on her sword and apologize - but perhaps she doesn't even have the right to do that if her editor doesn't want or allow her to do so.

This is what they call being caught being a rock and a hard place I suppose - let me relate a story from some years ago. The company I was working for then had failed to deliver on a contract and the client was very angry. I was like, ooops yeah clearly we have made some mistakes, let me check with my boss as to what we can do in terms of compensating you. I had worked out a small token sum that we could give the client as a gesture of goodwill.  My boss was only willing to pay it out on the condition that we do NOT apologize or even acknowledge that we had done anything wrong. Yup that was the kind of boss I had, he was so arrogant, he said, "Never say sorry! If you start apologizing and they will start demanding discounts and refunds all the time and we would never make any money!"

I was allowed to offer a partial refund to the client but not allowed to apologize.

So I sent the cheque, along with a covering letter that danced around the issue with sentences like, "Your feedback is very important to us and we are listening to everything you have reported back to us; that is why we have decided to send you this cheque in light of the information that you have presented to us as a gesture of goodwill. You are a very important customer and we very much want to maintain a good working relationship with you. I am very sorry it has taken me a few days to get this cheque to you, please accept my humble apologies. Thank you so much for your patience - please let me know if you require anything else or if you have any other questions."

I had smuggled the words "I am very sorry" and "please accept my humble apologies" into the letter - but note how I only apologized for having taken a few days to resolve this for the client rather than for the massive fuck up in the first place. Anyway, I managed to diplomatically offer an apologetic letter whilst not disobeying my MD's instruction not to offer any kind of apology. Such is the nature of working for a difficult boss - maybe Ms Almenoar has a difficult boss who doesn't want her to apologize (even if she wanted to). She is the one getting all the blame and the heat for what has happened - yet she is part of the bigger SPH machine who do control what she writes and says as a journalist.

So there you go. There's probably more that meets the eye and this episode does remind us just how important the role of citizen journalism is in Singapore in the absence of a free press. What are your thoughts on this taxi driver story or Ms Almenoar's conduct? You know the drill - leave a comment below, don't be shy now :) Thanks!