Is it more important to the public that online platforms be accountable or for the government to be accountable? So, who are The Real Singapore’s real editors? Publishing of False Information on TRS – MP Zaqy Mohamad

Zaqy Mohamad   Zaqy Mohamad   (16, July 2013)

Publishing of False Information on The Real Singapore on 13 Jul 2013

I refer to the article by The Real Singapore (TRS): Chua Chu Kang Town Council Screws Up Again But Won’t “Come Clean” on 13 Jul 2013 (

The article makes serious allegations about me and the integrity of the Town Council GM. Clearly, there has been no replacement of any staircase railings as mentioned in the article whatsoever. The accusations published are clearly false and borders on defamation.

I am requesting that TRS shows evidential proof backing up the article within the next 24 hours and if unable, to remove the post and apologise for having published false information.

This matter is currently undergoing investigations for an insurance claim. I urge that all parties respect the legal process. I would have expected TRS to know that during such time, disclosure of the facts would be prejudicial to the parties involved. It seems even odder since TRS had been long aware that the article contributor, Ms Serene Tham, has personal interests, as the one claiming insurance in this case. TRS should thus instead, take great care to validate all facts before considering to publish such potentially defamatory articles, as false allegations from the contributor made publicly will certainly not help Ms Tham’s case.

Over the course of the past 2 months, the Town Council had at no time, shied from its responsibilities in our communications with Ms Tham. The insurance company’s Loss Adjuster had in fact, been actively in touch with her for the past 2 months to investigate her claim. I wrote to Ms Tham yesterday and acknowledged that the GM’s e-mail to her 2 months ago had a typo mistake. I was replying to her notification of this mistake sent to us only a week ago on the 10 Jul 2013. Save for the DID contact of the investigating officer, all other details including the investigator’s name, company and e-mail contact were correct. Clearly, the typo error did not hamper the 2 months of communications and investigations with the insurer.

All I am asking is for TRS to be transparent and accountable in what it publishes. Our position is clear – that we will respect the decision of the insurers and their independent investigators. We hope TRS will do the same to do the right thing and address my requests to prove the veracity of their article.


   Zaqy Mohamad

Publishing of False Information on The Real Singapore on 13 Jul 2013 (Response 2)

I thank The Real Singapore (TRS) for their response earlier today (

As at 1235AM, 24 hours following my post, TRS has not taken down the post. Despite its reply, it has not provided proof on the two allegations I took issue with in my post.

The allegations about the replacement of railings at the staircase are false. All evidence is in public view that the railings have been there for some time and not new.

TRS could have also checked with Ms Tham or the insurers with a simple question, which it has not so far. Has she been in contact with insurer’s Loss Adjustment officer to investigate her case over the past 2 months? We were only informed there was a typo in the contact number provided only on 10 Jul 2013, a few days ago. We acknowledged to Ms Tham that this may have caused some inconvenience, but had no bearing on the claims investigations ongoing for 2 months.

My intent for the post is to set the record straight for public record as TRS had allowed the posting with serious allegations in the public domain. It is unfortunate that in its reply, TRS set out to cloud the situation further rather than abide by editorial integrity, even though I personally put forth our facts to defend the allegations.

Our interest here is not with Ms Tham nor any opinions of the case that TRS wishes to allow posted. We reserve our rights to protect the interests of all parties involved in the claims, including the interest of Ms Tham.

Our position remains that we will respect the claims investigation being conducted and the legal process, and be accountable for the outcome – whether in our favour or otherwise.


by Fabrications About The PAP

Who are The Real Singapore’s real editors?

Published on Jul 17, 2013 , SPH

MYSTERY surrounds the identity of the editors of The Real Singapore (TRS), who until yesterday were believed to be a couple living in Australia.

It was sparked by a TRS statement yesterday signed off by a “Mohd Farhan”, with the title “chief editor”.

Checks on its website found a total of five TRS articles signed off by either a “Farhan” or “Mohd Farhan”.

One article was linked to the Twitter profile and website of 27-year-old writer Farhan Shah. When contacted, he denied being involved with TRS and expressed surprise his website was linked to it.

He said he had written the article for another website, but it had been reproduced by TRS without his consent.

Separately, The Straits Times was contacted by someone claiming to be a “Farhan” representing TRS.

He said he was not Mr Farhan Shah, adding that it was not true an Australian-based couple are editors of TRS. He declined to comment further.

The Straits Times understands from a source who is in contact with TRS, that Dr Joseph Ong and Mr Alex Tan remain linked with TRS.

Dr Ong, a medical doctor believed to be in his 30s, was linked previously to the defunct website Temasek Review. He was arrested in 2011 for conducting an illegal election exit poll.

When contacted, he said he did not know anything about TRS and refused to comment further.

Mr Tan, a 25-year-old systems engineer and blogger who contested in the 2011 general election under the Reform Party banner, is one of the founders of TRS.

He could not be contacted yesterday.



Comments :

  • If u put that statement in TRS, their followers will bombard u with vulgarities and personal attacks kinda comments. And mind u, those comments are well encouraged by TRS without being blocked or deleted. But when u say something out of good intention to encourage people to think objectively and reasonable, even with polite mannerism you will get deleted and blocked eventually by TRS. Just stating the facts here and I believe many will be able to testify to this experience.
  • TRS is not reflective of the real Singapore at all. Just a bunch of angry admins with their own personal agendas who only welcome hatred comments in favor of whatever articles they posted. Single minded and not objective. Politicizing everything and anything.
  • My horrendous experience with TRS yesterday…the admins completely deleted a post they misquote from a Malaysian blogger-lawyer. Then deleted all mine and other people’s comment who aren’t in favor of TRS’ action. We who tried to be reasonable and objective in our comments, have been blocked by TRS from commenting further. Freedom of speech? I’d say TRS is utter hypocrites. Unethical and disgraceful to the social media journalism.
  • I quote Joseph Goebbels: “in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily” (This time it is really Joseph Goebbels)
    And also Adolf Hitler: “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently, it will be believed.”
  • Use to like TRS but now realise they suck. This lady is ovber-reacting and don’t seem to know how to follow process.. Instead of giving advice TRS now probably make her claim more complicated and maybe delay the process.  Understandably she is upset if the injury is real but to defame and make false allegations surely may affect the insurance investigation?
    TRS without self-censorship you will spoil market for the rest of our alternative media.
  •  I think TRS has missed the forest for the trees. The response given by TRS lacks total credibility – worse still, they say “that any and all content online or otherwise is susceptible to bias and is often only one side of the story”. How can the public then trust online sources as a believable and credible media source? Does this mean that online sources are just there to share mis-truths, thus unnecessarily causing public alarm? Surely, this cannot be the intent. If online news sources want to be taken seriously, then shape up!


by TH


Related Article :


One comment on “Is it more important to the public that online platforms be accountable or for the government to be accountable? So, who are The Real Singapore’s real editors? Publishing of False Information on TRS – MP Zaqy Mohamad

  1. Tan Hock says:

    IMHO, TRS will probably continue with its obnoxious behaviour of regurgitating untruths, “stealing” other’s items and misrepresenting to incite fear and hatred towards singapore.
    Once, i posted in internet. TRS wrote a header comment,an ending comment, and repost in TRS without hint of acknowledgement. I pointed it out to TRS, and asked for rectification……I was banned and blocked after that…… Hence TRS is not worthy .of any representation…..

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s