Chua Jui Meng "buried" by The Star

Now that nominations to the MCA elections have been made, “officially” kicking off the campaigning, how has the MCA paper, The Star, covered the politicking leading up to the elections starting today? Have things improved since our blog entry of 9 August 2005, when we found the paper failing its readers and basic journalism miserably?

Well, they have not. In fact, its coverage has become even worse in yesterday’s report of Chua Jui Meng, who is taking on Ong Ka Ting for the post of MCA President.

Both the New Straits Times and theSun each gave a report to Chua’s press conference at Corus Hotel. And both led with Chua’s complaints about the current MCA, calling it “undemocratic”, among other things. Both papers also touched on why Chua had to call for the press conference and what he thought of the three-page “report card” issued jointly by Ong and Chan Kong Choy following nominations.

The NST gave more attention to Chua’s reason for calling the press conference. He was reported as saying that he was forced to do so as he had no other avenue to get through to delegates and explain his stand. He said he believed the delegates were told to avoid him.

Chua also said he knew who instructed the delegates to avoid him but he apparently did not say who it was; both the NST and theSun did not mention any names.

Meanwhile, theSun gave more emphasis to Chua’s view of Ong and Chan’s “report card”. Chua reportedly said that he was “flattered” by it because it was actually based on his manifesto, issued early last month, soon after he declared his intention to run for the presidency.

Indeed, soon after Chua came out with his manifesto, Ong was asked whether he would also issue his. Ong reportedly said he did not see the need for it. Chua took a swipe at Ong’s change of mind in coming up with the report card with Chan a few days ago.

Blacked out

So, how did The Star cover the above issues? It deliberately blacked out important relevant facts, thereby skewing its coverage.

Chua’s press conference was mentioned in one of the three election-related reports today; but it was obviously buried. It took up the last four paragraphs of a 11-paragraph piece entitled “Candidates in last dash campaign before polls”.

While there was mention of Chua’s manifesto, it was skewed only to show him saying he was prepared to spend a lot of time working on it to deliver on his promises. The report blacked out Chua’s contention that Ong and Chan’s report card was based on his manifesto.

Furthermore, The Star had a statement on Chua’s claim that delegates were told to avoid him, but not about how Chua said he knew who had been issuing the instruction. Instead, the paper immediately stated that Ong and Chan had told delegates they were free to meet any candidates.

The Star also ran an analysis (as opposed to news report) by Wong Chun Wai (a news editor) entitled “VP race results hard to predict”. Of the 22 paragraphs, only paragraphs 14 and 15 deal with the race for the posts of president and vice president.

Wong was confident that Ong and Chan would win their respective contests. Then, he abruptly stated that Chua (and Ting Chew Peh) had held a press conference—but nothing on any of Chua’s controversial claims reported by the NST and theSun.

Given Wong’s confidence, it would have made some sense - or at least it would have made his writing less glaringly deficient - to state why Chua had the press conference. But then again, that would probably get in the way of his paper’s apparent intention of blacking out certain facts.

Quite clearly, The Star’s coverage reflected its own “cai dan” or preference for Ong to fill the top MCA post. While it is acceptable for any paper to have a preference, they should also strive to be fair to all the candidates. They should restrict their stand only to their editorial column and try their best not to let it skew their news reporting of the different candidates.

And so, by deliberately blacking out certain pertinent facts, The Star continues to fail its readers and basic journalism miserably…