Oh, I’d like to think that ST’s poor coverage (that pun landed right on my lap) of a badly-aligned walkway in Jurong was just shoddy journalism. Sadly, it looks like it’s their best attempt at a cover-up. It took nearly a year for the project to get done, several residents of the area have told me, but ST dodges that fact and more.
Check out that headline for a start. Instead of something factual, like “LTA leaves project half-done for nearly a year”, or something gentle like “LTA explanation for covered walkway: it was according to plan”, ST chooses to go instead for “LTA clears up mystery of misaligned sheltered walkway in Jurong West”, which is already watered down from their initial headline “LTA solves mystery…” (see the URL). Wow, way to turn a bad project into a heroic act.
Then, the paper doesn’t even ask the very basic question of how long the walkway has been misaligned. Clearly LTA has the exact date, but noooo, don’t ask them. And don’t ask any long-time residents either. Instead, get a date from a teacher who just joined the school next door in July 2017, and who says that the joke of a walkway was already there when she joined.
And of course, no questions posed to LTA about why social media outcry resulted in the crossing getting fixed in just one day, when it took nearly a year of, what, nobody on the project noticed that something was amiss? Residents not saying anything? Grassroots didn’t raise it to the MP? MP doesn’t walk the ground? (Check the GRC map if you want to know who).
Any other reasons for the year-long delay? How much feedback has LTA received about the walkway since it was built? ST doesn’t even ask these basic questions. For shame.
Meanwhile, PAP propaganda channels are going into overdrive to criticise those that criticised the project. Shoddy journalism opens the door to fake news, but I don’t even know if you could call this shoddy journalism – perhaps more like ass-covering (for which you get the stink of faeces on you), or punches pulled so hard that the paper might as well hit itself in the face.