So, let's imagine Sir Alan Sugar (or Donald Trump, if you prefer the American version) saying to the contestants, "Your task is to create a pop song and music video with the purpose of attracting people to your church, to spread the gospel and you will be judged by the results. To win this task, the pop song and music video not only has to be successful and popular, it has to generate a profit as a business venture and convert non-believers to Christianity - or at least get them interested in Christianity after having watched the music video. Watch your budget as we are looking for a good return on your investment. Good luck and I'll see you back in the boardroom."
Let's focus on the China Wine music video and treat it as a final product they present to Sir Alan Sugar (or Donald Trump). Now I am seeing this from a very pragmatic business point of view. I have worked a long time in marketing and PR - modesty aside, I have even been invited to be an industry expert on The Apprentice in the UK in 2007 to offer my opinion (as part of a panel) to Sir Alan Sugar as he tests the contestants ability to come up with an effective marketing campaign for a product. Here's a screen grab from that episode.
 |
| That's me in the red tie, two seats behind Sir Alan Sugar on the apprentice |
In that episode, the task was pretty straight forward - the contestants are given a product (tissue paper in this case) and the contestants are told to create and shoot a 30 second commercial for the product with the simple aim of selling the product. We're not talking about brand awareness, we're not even talking about judging the ad on artistic merits - hell no, we're judging it on it's ability to make people go out there and BUY that brand of tissue paper. Yes marketing and PR is that brutal at the end of the day - you spend money on an ad and marketing campaign, you expect to see a real return from it in terms of an increase in sales revenue. This is a task done on practically every series of the Apprentice and those who fail often make a fundamental flaw: they do not put the product at the heart of the commercial. They try to be so quirky, so creative, so original, so ingenious etc that they forget that they are trying to sell a product like tissue paper - instead, they get carried away and think they're creating a piece of experimental film noir destined for the Tate Modern in London. And their excuse? They want people to be so intrigued by their piece of work that they will go google the brand name and try to find out more about those behind the project.
No, marketing doesn't work like that. That's why people who make that mistake always fail the task no matter how good their ad is at the end of the day - they have lost the plot, they have forgotten what the purpose of their ad was in the first place. Thus I am passing my judgement on project Crossover from that point of view: is it a successful marketing and PR project? After all, evangelism is a form of marketing and PR - when you are trying to convert people to your religion. It is one of the oldest form of marketing there is.
 |
| Sex sells, right? Even for religion? Just ask Sun Ho. |
After all, the proof is in the pudding. Did China Wine chart anywhere - US, Canada, UK, even Singapore? No. Did it generate any significant revenue for Sun Ho (and her production company) as a result? Again, no. Such songs need a certain amount of commercial success before they can start generating any revenue - so for example, if 'China Wine' was featured on the soundtrack of a big Hollywood film, or if 'China Wine' was featured on a major brand's international advertising campaign (or associated with a major event, like the Olympic Games). But no, so far, that has not happened - with very little sales, very little airplay - this project failed to generate any significant revenue that could have gone towards covering the cost of the project (S$10 million was spent on producing her album).
But wait, what if Sun Ho argued that her music was purely evangelical, ie. it was meant to spread the gospel, to attract people to her church - it was never meant to be a commercial success. Well a lot of gospel, spiritual music do fall into that category and whilst popular, such music was never meant to be commercially successful in a way that Madonna or Lady Gaga is. So this begs the question, what is the effect of Sun Ho's music on the people who have heard it and seen her 'China Wine' music video then? Does it achieve its desired effect?
 |
| Was this a hit? Never. It never charted anywhere. Not even Singapore. |
In the Apprentice episode, the producers assembled a group of experts (including yours truly) to see what our reaction was to the ad they created for the tissue paper brand. We need a panel as well to judge the effect of Sun Ho's China Wine on the public who have seen the video. This prompted me to go back to Youtube and watch the notorious China Wine video again - after all, Youtube is a very modern medium of democracy - you can't argue with the results. Beyond the number of hits per se on each video, you also get to see how many 'likes' vs 'dislikes' (thumbs up/down) there are on each video as well as the comments. China Wine has 2078 likes vs 4317 dislikes. That's 2.077 dislikes for every one like. Oh dear. That's not good - you can't argue with numbers like that.
Let's compare that to Adele's Rolling In The Deep: it has 1.54 million likes and 39,745 dislikes - making that 38.9 likes for every dislike. You get the idea - it is pretty obvious when a song is overwhelmingly liked or disliked with figures like that. There are plenty of comments by the viwers as well and as I read the comments, I burst out laughing. I am going to cut and paste some of the best ones - there are just so, so many!
This and her other terrible videos, has made the CHC church in Singapore and all their other branch churches, the laughing stock of the world. It shows them to be a cult church that is really chasing after material wealth instead of the kingdom of God.
I wanna tear my eyes out!!!!!
Facts abt Singapore's Miley Cyrus Wanna-be..
1. She can't sing
2. She will never make it to the US Music Industry despite buyin her ways
3. Most people never heard of 'China Wine' until this incident
4. Which part of the song speak or spread Christianity?
5. She can't even make it big in Singapore, what makes her think she will succeed in US?
6. Havin Faith & believing in God will not make you RICH. It will bring you peace & rich in love. Not money!!
BIG EPIC FAIL!!!
lets China wine with 50 million of City Harvest Church Funds.. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! Shame on you bastards. making use of religion and church goers to feed your materialistic greed.
she is thw queen of sluts, before every sermon they play her video
Preaching the gospel one china wine at a time.
I'm trying hard to see the Lord but I'm being distracted by a sluttily dressed woman flinging her bing-bongs at the camera
to chun leong sim This is NOT Christianity. NEVER. they are using church funds obviously to become a star, yet God said be in the world BUT not of the World. Anyone who cannot see that needs to read the Bible. Disgusting, using religion to make money. Beware of so called churches when all they preach is love and giving tithes which are not biblical, I CANT BELIEVE HOW MANY BRAIN DEAD PEOPLE SIT IN PEWS and call this diatribe Christianity. When some say Lord He will say go away i know u not.
This video makes Rebecca black Friday looks good
JESUS said " flee from sexual immortality" . It seems she promoting it
CHC members, do you seriously think this vulgar performance of a dance will attract non-believers to cross-over to Christianity? If you really believe this, then you must also seriously question your intelligence as a human being. I'm flabbergasted.
this song should be retitled China Swine.
no wonder her album didn't get release. shit music
why...oh...why....did i ever click on this video ????
i just threw up my dinner and lunch.....maybe breakfast too......
this horse-face lousy excuse for a popstar wannabe......
even the Devil himself finds her too farking ugly to be in hell....
fucking city harvest dogs, supporting this bitch and that cheater Kock Hee. Materialist church only supports its best interests. The core of their teachings = materialism. Their cell groups dont do shit except taking pictures of themselves and puttin on facebook. Fuck kong hee, that motherfucking lying piece of shit
Well praise the lord, i wonder if she will suck my dick in the church car park pastor slut xx
What an utter disgrace and embarrassment to all Christians! Can't believe she and her husband Kong Hee are still allowed to continue their pastoral duties and preach in a church! What a slut and whore!
 |
| Support Leslie Chew's brilliant work! |
I could go on cutting & pasting a lot more comments but you get the idea - this song is overwhelmingly hated on Youtube, especially by Singaporeans who are acutely embarrassed by it. To be honest, I don't have a problem with her wearing next to nothing and dancing in a provocative manner, it is a free world and I am extremely liberal. Even if she wants to go one step further and do an Annabel Chong in America, that's cool by me too. (Hey, what is it with Singaporean women in California?) But how does this relate to her task in the first place - to spread Christianity and preach the gospel? By that token, this makes her project a total failure in the context of the Apprentice because it did not achieve its most basic objective.
For the fans of The Apprentice, you would be familiar with the scene when the results are announced and we find out which team has won and which team has lost - oh the look of despair on the faces of the losers, knowing that one of them from that team would be fired. In the most recent series of The Apprentice (UK Series 9), we were treated to an amazing display of complete denial. In week 5, team leader Zeeshan Shah was dealt a shock defeat - he was so confident that his team would have won the task given that the task was set in Dubai, a city he he has lived in and knew well. Zeeshan made a fundamental error in the boardroom when he was faced with the prospect of being fired.
Now normally when your neck is on the line, the sensible thing to do is to say, "okay, I made some mistakes, but I have learnt from them and I won't make those mistakes again." It can be immensely frustrating to deal with someone who goes into complete denial about the whole thing and refuse to take any responsibility for the failure of the task. Zeeshan went into 'complete denial' mode and that led to him being fired. The most amazing thing was despite everything that happened, when Zeeshan went on 'The Apprentice, You're Fired' (a talkshow where the losing candidate explains what went wrong, hosted by comedian Dara O'Briain), he was still in complete denial and even claimed that he had done a very good job on the task (despite the dismal results, being the losing team and being fired as a result). It was one of those moments when you just wanted to scream at the TV, "what drugs are you on man?! How far can your self-denial go? You suck! You suck so bad! You got fired because you suck so bad! What part of 'you're fired' do you not understand you idiot?"
Okay, so that's just one really stupid idiot making a fool of himself on Reality TV, but we are seeing the same thing happening with the people trying to justify Sun Ho's career. Even today, Kong Hee's lawyer claimed that, "Sun Ho's career was worth US$25 million." One can only scratch one's head in complete amazement and wonder whom the lawyer Edwin Tong was trying to convince and if he thought anyone was going to believe him. Surely a better line of defense would be to argue that regardless of what how rubbish Sun Ho's career was, there was really nothing illegal being done here as the congregation at City Harvest Church gladly offered their money ("tithing") without any conditions attached so if they wanted to blow many millions on Sun Ho's music career and project Crossover, then that's not immoral per se and all they're guilty of is some accounting mismanagement. Edwin Tong could've given loads of examples of religious people who spend obscene amounts of money on crazy shit in the name of religion, rather than compare Sun Ho to big stars like Beyonce, Shakira and Missy Elliot.
Indeed, playing this card may work in their favour, by conceding, "yes we made some mistakes along the way but it is really not a big deal when you consider the context..." This would certainly go down a lot better than Zeeshan Shah's brand of compete denial which led to him being fired. Who knows, if Zeeshan had shown a bit of humility by conceding his mistakes, Sir Alan may have given him a second chance - but it is almost impossible to want to give someone in complete denial a second chance. Where do you begin?
But guess what? These people like Kong Hee and Zeeshan Shah will deny you the opportunity to tell them, "See? I told you so." Dara O'Briain tried it, but Zeeshan was still in complete denial long after he got fired. Kong Hee is looking at a substantial jail sentence and rather than try to bargain his way for a light sentence, he is going to go down yelling, "not guilty!" (Kong Hee claimed that god himself has already apologized for all his legal struggles, so I guess that makes it okay?) I wonder how long into his jail sentence he would keep up this complete denial? Not too long I suspect, given how a Singaporean prison cell is going to be far cry from his Sentosa Cove residence, but by then it would be too late for him to change his mind. Aaah well, get ready for some Schadenfreude and "See see see, I told you so!"
So what do you think about the issue? Have you any more juicy details on the case to share with us? You know the drill, please leave a comment below and let me know what you think. Many thanks, kum siah!
I think that a large number of the people I know who are against Kong Hee and his wife, and their whole excuse of a Crossover Project, are however of the opinion that Kong Hee has someone in higher places working to help protect him. Their opinion is that he might get away with a light tap on the wrist while the other accomplices might get heavier sentences. Considering Singapore's reputation for its kangaroo courts, I would not be surprised if their predictions come true. Sigh...
ReplyDeleteThere is seriously a catch to all of these. If Kong Hee does get away scot-free or with a light sentence, then there is a potential risk of the identity of the whistleblower being 'outed' and revealed. What Kong Hee and his associates would then do against that whistleblower would be as good a guess as anyone else's. The PAP has always had a history of fixing their political opponents for cases such as defamation, and judging from Kong Hee's ties and money (to be able to engage a PAP member of parliament as his defence lawyer), it has been believed by some that he will go all out to ruin the whistleblower, should that person's identity ever be revealed. Then again, everything is still up for throws. I am going to watch this case with much curiosity. It will not change my views of Kong Hee as a religious confidence trickster, and his church as a cult based on principles of prosperity-seeking, materialism, and immoral values anathema to Christianity's core values. But this case will cement what I already know and think of Singapore's system of justice.
Hello Kev, ahnyonghaseyeo :)
DeleteAs I have mentioned in my latest vlog piece, I just find it incredible that they chose to break the law when they could have so easily got away with it by risking a bit of bad PR but not cooking the books. So now, not only is this headline news (bad PR anyone?) but they are facing jail time.
Let me give you an example I know - there's this church in Singapore who had an ambitious church building project. They had a modest size church building already, but they raised a LOT of money from the congregation to demolish the existing church building (which was completed in 1993) and build a brand new building which was a LOT bigger, complete with a shiny glass & steel facade, multi-storey underground carpark and looks more like an office block.
An insider tells me, "the church is really only full at Christmas time and maybe Easter, otherwise most of the time, the main hall is barely half full and the underground carpark is nearly empty. We thought that if we had a bigger church, we could fill it - we didn't. In hindsight, maybe we didn't need such a big church? It cost so much to build it. I got the impression that the pastor and staff wanted to show off, like 'my church building is bigger and taller than yours'..."
OK so this church expansion was a bad idea at most I suppose, but there was absolutely nothing illegal about it. So even if CHC wanted to say, build huge gold statues of Kong Hee and Sun Ho in their church, it would be a waste of money - but it wouldn't be illegal if the congregation gladly consents to it and the project is built with money given willingly by the congregation. People do all kinds of crazy shit in the name of religion all the time anyway...
So why did they have to resort to round tripping?!?!
Hi Limpeh, your example of the church in Singapore reminds me a little of New Creation Church which has been compared to City Harvest Church for various ostensible reasons, some of which are not good ones--including the immense dedication to the building more than the congregation or orthodox beliefs. But about the round tripping, mainly the 'voodoo' with the accounts and the constant spate of denials from the people involved, it is hard to believe that they would even try to resort to using God to justify this by saying that God said sorry to them!!!!!! Incredulous....In a denomination like the one which I attended in Canada, the Lutheran church, such behavior would have garnered Kong Hee immediate excommunication, not just for the financial 'voodoo' but also the heretical beliefs he is spouting one minute at a time. The numerous online responses to the case, even the relatively objective ones, have stated that Kong Hee and his accomplices have an uphill legal battle to fight, and whether they get away with this or not, I think that the reputation of the group and their church is already sullied.
DeleteYour whole suggestion that building huge golden statues of oneself inside a church might not be illegal if a naive, unsuspecting church congregation endorses it is in itself fulfilled in the famous example of Robert Schuller's Crystal Cathedral in CA. Robert Schuller did not break any laws, as much as he spouted heresy in the form of Positive Confession which was nowhere near what the Bible said, and in every corner of the Crystal Cathedral which had vital Biblical tableaus adorning it, the statues of Biblical figures seemed (creepily so.....) to carry a remarkable facial resemblance to Robert Schuller himself. Of course, Kong Hee's case--much like Robert Schuller's Crystal Cathedral which has now fallen on financial troubles and has ceded its land to a Catholic diocese under much financial duress--has a morality tale underpinning it: of God versus Mammon(wealth). City Harvest Church worships the latter more than anything else, and there is always a heavy price to pay. And please, all that lavish excess showered on Sun Ho in terms of "love gifts"...what a waste of money when it can be given in the name of the Lord for charity!
As an aside, on the video of "China Wine", I seriously want to burst out laughing. Kong Hee openly called himself 'China Boy' alongside his wife as 'China Wine' during a Presence conference in Sydney, which has been covered by church watch-groups, and seriously, when I saw that clip online, I was like(echoing those online views of their sense of geography being totally messed up), "Kong Hee and Sun Ho, did you both hit your heads on the floor after getting 'slain in the Spirit', and then screwed up your sense of direction????!!???"
Delete@Kevin, I have a more extreme view. I'm of the opinion that all religion is only about making money. I will refrain from mentioning on Buddhism, Taoism and Islam for now since I do not fully understand them.
DeleteBut taking Christianity (or any variation thereof) as an example, when I was growing up (still naive) I attended several churches. 2 of which later turned out to have their founders accused of financial impropriety. One is called Calvary Charismatic Centre (currently Victory Family Centre) whose founder Rick Seaward was later charged and found guilty and had to serve 1 day in jail. The other of which is CHC whom I shall not mention since the trial is still on-going.
I have no doubt that even if Kong Hee is found guilty he will be let off lightly. Partly because quite a few MPs are staunch Christians and who knows how influential CHC had become over the years.
Also I think something is going on with another megachurch called New Creation but since there have been no whistle blowers or investigations into them yet I'm not sure how long their charade will continue.
Needless to say nowadays I'm a skeptic and generally don't subscribe to any organised religion. I would consider myself more of an agnostic rather than atheist.
Thanks for your comments guys - I refer you to Hea Bea's comment below about Kong Hee's ambition to become a superstar international pastor like Yoggi Cho.
Delete@choaniki, actually I understand that you dislike organized religion. But from what you said about your past as a church-goer, would you not think that your skeptical views about Christianity are partially shaped by your attendance of Charismatic churches, some of which have not been recognized as valid Christian denominations or bodies by orthodox churches? After all, City Harvest and New Creation are just seen as 'cult' churches and organizations by the majority of churches in Singapore, and as a Christian myself, (no offence anyone about the later view and opinion....) I DO NOT recognize the validity of these two churches and some other Charismatic churches and their members' faith as 'Christian' because of their departure from most of the core historical principles of the faith.
DeleteI think that I have said before in an earlier comment like you that Kong Hee is likely to get away with it scot-free or with a light sentence, but it probably would not change our opinions and judgments about the case. Kong Hee has an increasingly uphill task trying to convince the more astute people about his so-called 'innocence'.
Let's wait and see what happens with this case. It shows more of how flawed and ineffective Singapore's justice system is at delivering justice if you ask me....all the multiple cases of corrupt civil servants being charged and then let off just like that prior to the Kong Hee case is PREDICTABLY anti-climactic and not even half impressive. I am just thankful I am out of this silly fray and manufactured drama.
Wah seh, you sibeh steady, you were actually on The Apprentice UK?? Next time got lobang let me know leh, I also want to tekan the contestants with impossible tasks and even more impossible standards.
ReplyDeleteTo be very frank, I never watched the China (s)Wine vid until now. My first thoughts were WTF the 2 orh lang KPKB about in the first part of the video?? Then the next thing that came to my mind was the title says "China Wine", but how come she talk like some shrivelled Jamaican punani let out in the sun too long? And what's this nonsense of hiring dreadlocked raeggae dudes to coach Sun...she aiming for West Indies Top 40 issit? Or watched too much Pirates of the Carribean?
Long story short, CHC may claim to have some of the brightest brains in their midst, but I agree with you what you said about the brutal realities of marketing and business, and I think even bloody Homer Simpson can do a better job selling his underwear to Miley Cyrus to wear and do her twerking than getting old geisha to twerk (hope she don't dislocate her hips) with orh lang KPKB and dancing around her.
I seriously saw no point to her video...like that is called spreading the Gospel meh? I don't think Jesus and the Disciples engaged in simi LJ crossover, crossback, t-back breakdancing stunt to spread the Word...(sorry Father...I mean Abba...)
As my late bibik grandmother would say, "bodoh lah lu, mati sudah lah"...wake up, people.
Hello again, apa kahbar? Ya, aku ada lobang lah, as we say. I didn't tekan the contestants per se lah, we sat through the 2 different presentations, asked them some questions, they then left the room. Sir Alan took to the stage and asked us for feedback and we had an informal chat about what we thought, pointed out good and bad things about both projects then proceeded to have a lovely buffet lunch - hmmmm. Yes they have good catering on set :) It was all very cordial, very polite - tiada 'tekan' lah. But I've been dealing with the media for years lah, so plenty of lobang. (Check out my Youtube channel, I've been on TV loads over the years in the UK).
DeleteChina Wine ... aiyoh, don't get me start lah, alamak. Let me produce I can give her better results siah. Limpeh even worked on a UK dance no. 1 before (told you I've dabbled in media over the years).
since CHC is so rich why they still need to borrow $45M?
ReplyDeletehttp://infopub.sgx.com/Apps?A=COW_CorporateAnnouncement_Content&B=AnnouncementLast3Months&F=899146&fileId=Announcement.pdf
Hi there. I cannot answer that question as I am not a CHC insider, I suspect only an insider can give you an accurate answer to that question!
DeleteHowever, I would just like to point out that borrowing $45m doesn't mean they are broke per se, it just means that they have a gap in their finances they need to fill. It is common for businesses, companies, businessmen etc to take out loans when they have a gap in their finances for a short to medium term: for example, a business wants to open a new shop in town, so in the short run, they need a loan to cover all the costs associated with opening that new shop. So they take a loan to bridge them over to allow them to open that new shop, in the knowledge that once that shop is up and running, it will be generating plenty of revenue & profit, enough for them to pay off that loan reasonably quickly and make the new shop a profitable venture. So in the long run, it is a wise and profitable business move to open that new shop. But in the short run, they are getting themselves into debt by borrowing money and getting that loan.
Another simple example of how taking a loan doesn't mean you're broke. Years ago when I bought my first property, I had a mortgage, ie. I took a loan from the bank to purchase my first property. Was I borrowing money because I was broke and couldn't pay my bills? No, quite on the contrary, I had enough to live very comfortably and pay for a substantial down payment for my flat - banks are not going to give you a mortgage unless you can put down a substantial down payment. The loan allowed me to make a purchase that I would not have otherwise been able to make in cash and I was willing to get into debt in the short run in order to get my hands on that flat I liked.
DeleteSo why did CHC borrow $45m? I don't know - but who would land an organization that amount of money if they were not able to repay it (with interest)? The bank gladly gave me my mortgage because they were confident that I would pay it back (with interest) and they would make good money from that arrangement with me. The same would apply in CHC's $45m loan.
My Opinion: Kong Hee doesn't want to stay in the game of playing a mere pastor to a big church in Singapore. He aims to be bigger than Yonggi Cho. He wants to be a world's number one. With that in mind, he could not afford any bit of bad PR. Now that his ambition is not likely to realize, it may be more comfortable for him to live in complete denial. Some people are like that, they don't bargain. Either their way all the way or not at all. Anything else is plain boring and not worth it.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment Hea Bea.
DeleteI think you're spot on in your observation! In fact, you're so incredibly spot on that I have decided to pull my latest vlog episode because you have just answered a question I asked in that episode about Kong He''s motivation but failed to answer (but you have just done so, in one paragraph, wow). Talk about hitting the nail on the head.
You're good! I am honoured to have readers like you, please keep your comments coming.
Well, it was going to take me hours to edit it anyway and I have to leave for the airport at 4 pm (and it's 11:30 am now) ... Editing videos is a bitch - sometimes I do a tightly scripted piece which is super easy to edit, other times, I rush out a rambling piece which I then have to piece together - it has a far more natural feel to it because it is not scripted at all and I just talk (then have to sift through a LOT of footage), but boy that process takes hours. I can't face sifting through all that footage right now.
DeleteHi Limpeh, thanks for validating my observation! I happened to be visiting CHC and heard Kong Hee compare the age difference between Yonggi Cho and himself. He went on to say that he had 'X' numbers of years to achieve what the former had accomplished. That gave me the idea. If you were at the service, you would have put two and two together too!
DeleteAs regards your vlog on Kong Hee's motivation, happy editing! Had I known about it, I would still have gone ahead and post my comment at the time I post it. LOL.
Well, I appreciate your insight - given that I neither live in Singapore nor would I ever visit CHC (I am an atheist and even if I was a Christian, I would not pick CHC as my choice of church), I am most grateful that you have shared that with me and my readers.
DeleteNah, I am going to just delete the footage on that vlog post and think about reshooting something else next week, I will instead write a blog piece on the issue with your insight in mind. Thanks again.
Hi Limpeh, you have been too kind and generous with your compliments. Nonetheless, you are welcome. But I only come upon a brainwave like once in a blue moon? LOL. Btw, your illustration of round tripping - best! Salute!
DeleteI don't think that CHC ever claimed that Sun Ho's music career was to spread religion. He said it was 'secular music'. So I don't think there is a failure to spread Christianity through her music, her music just falls flat in itself and fails to spread or inspire anything.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I've seen, it sounds like the funds were used illegally because they were building fund money. As in, the congregation willingly gave that money but it was meant for building funds, not her music career, so it is considered a misappropriation of funds.