When I got the news feed from Google that Singapore has become the 15th most liveable city, the naughty me googled the entry to find out more. Honestly, I am not surprised at all to see various articles on Singapore's ranking, each with its own slant. Take for example this article (hope it is still around when you are reading this). This article in Singapore Start-up says that Singapore is the 3rd most liveable city in Asia (and 21st in the World?). The rest of the article is about how wonderful a city Singapore is. It even has a Youtube video that goes with it. Guess what - when I click to find out the source of the video it is by Your Singapore.
In contrast, the article by Asiaone writes:
"SINGAPORE has slipped from 18th to 21st spot in London-based lifestyle and global-affairs magazine Monocle's list of the world's 25 most liveable cities.
The magazine's editorial team, comprising editors and correspondents from news agencies worldwide, felt that Singapore was lagging behind other cities as its neighbourhoods lacked a sense of community and its people did not have a good work-life balance.
Monocle editor-in-chief Tyler Brule said the key reason for Singapore's slide was that "some cities are simply doing a better job".
This article obviously has a different slant. ( If you continue to read the article, it has a rather balanced view, at least in my opinion).
These days we really have to be careful with the things we read. You may asked
Q: Why I am more so 'anal' when I read?
A: Because, people writes to persuade. And, when they are really desperate, you can count on them to give half-truths and/or deliberately leave out information to make their point.
I kind of categorised the news I read into 3 different categories:
1. Those tabloid articles ( aka gossip) which selectively writes some facts to catch people's attention. Boring details are ignored, so is information that contradicts their view. More often than not, the writer did not even bother to find out more information on the situation. Typical examples of these are entertainment news. The purpose of these articles is to increase readership. Of course, a number of other papers write this sort of articles.
2. The second type of article is the usual standard news we find in daily newspaper. They provide enough information for the public to get by. For example, when there is an incident on chemical contamination on Bubble Tea ( a recent incident), I would expect a decent news article to provide information such as:
- What types of drinks are affected?
- What are the chemicals found in lab tests?
- What is the consequences if the drinks are consumed? ( preferably the estimated amount stated - since toxicology is in the dose!)
- What actions have the authority taken? When the consumers go to the shops, what should they look out for ?
3. The third type of articles are those detailed analysis report which interviews the relevant people and try to squeeze out their intentions. These articles would give the background information as to how the incident comes about. In addition, the information are usually from a varied perspective from different groups of people. For examples, if consumers are interviewed, the article would include interviews from the producers; Likewise, plaintiff and defendants, victims and injurer...
Then again, having more details does not mean there are no slant ...
In this information age, it is not about lack of information, but rather making sense of the overwhelming amount of (at times biased) information available.
Reading tips
1. When reading it is always useful to have in mind the purpose of the writer. It is also useful to find about the source the article is from.
2. The next thing is abit tricky: Rather than just read about what is written. Think about what is not written (or could have been written, but not). There are few possibilities:
- The usual information you would expect to get is not available. This reflects the constrain of the writer. This is rather common in articles about war, or ... policies ( hmm ...)
- The information is purposefully left out.
- The writer thinks that it is not important. ( this and the prior point shows the slant of the writer)
- The nature of the information. (There are alot to talk about in this category, and it will be for another time if opportunity arises. )
3. Just to pen down my thoughts a little ... look at the proportion of the people involved and the sample space of the people involved.
( Read: The Tiger that Isn't and The Black Swan)
You will be surprised how much more you can infer when view an article from this angle. Hmm ...
