I tried to refrain from commenting, cos it would take up a lot of time, but the skewed reports make me feel like shouting. My reasons are as below:
- NTU’s credibility is doubtful
- No direct link between scholarship and student’s emotions (which actually made #1 even more obvious)
- No direct link between excessive gaming and impulsive act (inconsistent message conveyed by NTU)
- Too much positive light on Prof
My #1 was not with regards to whether NTU had been lying in the past. It was more of a ‘NTU’s reputation is at stake and they will do everything to protect it’ kind of thing. This meant that whatever that comes from NTU’s spokesman should be taken with a pinch of salt, UNLESS they back it up with unbiased 3rd party findings.
Like a survey among NTU graduates on the popularity of the prof (MUST be graduates, cos undergrads are held hostage by their degrees; MUST be done by external, reputable parties). Or whether they think the FYP grading process was a fair one, or whether the profs 一视同仁 etc.
This brings us to #2, where the Indon Embassy (3rd party) was reported to have claimed that the student was ‘apparently upset’ over the revoking of scholarship. However, please note that this was quoted by an unknown Indon press, who quoted an Indon Embassy official who could not even confirm whether the student was angry at the prof for the revocation, or just plain upset. Even worse, in the quotes of the official, they said, ‘There is no problem with this professor. He was not the one who decided on the termination of the scholarship. The NTU staff said there seems to be a case of mistaken person’. (Quote 2)
Can you visualize the situation?
Indon Embassy knows that Student is upset by the revocation (the most certain thing we can conclude) and that they were not the one who linked this incident to the stabbing. It was the NTU staff who linked it and declared that ‘there seems to be a case of mistaken person’, without any DIRECT evidence that the 2 were linked.
The friends of Student confirmed Student was depressed over FYP, upset over scholarship, but never confirmed he had a target of hatred for either.
And cos NTU had a part in conjuring this false image, don’t you think it dents its credibility even more?
#3 came about in the wake of the incident. It can be regarded as being surfaced during the initial stages of NTU’s crisis management. They quoted an ex-club President who conjured an image of a Student who is silent, LONER and loved computer gaming. Some even suggested he palyed too much of it. Then there was a quote BY NTU of one of its prof that said Student misunderstood his instructions (Quote 2), leading up to the whole ‘misunderstanding’ of the revocation of scholarship affair and being unable to control his emotions.
But Student’s friends said he was an OK guy all the while, and became more reclusive during FYP.
There was inconsistency with what NTU said, and NTU later changed the statement from ‘loner’ to ‘misunderstanding’ (from the declaration of Indon Embassy official). All WITHOUT CONCRETE PROOF.
If you look at the reports, you will find a lot of things that appeal to readers to side with Prof. Like he had ‘two young children’, colleague said that he was ‘good-natured’, one (and ONLY ONE) ex-student said he was approachable, and there were a few paragraphs of Prof’s academic achievements. There were also reports of Prof ‘recovering well’, in good spirits etc. (Quote 3, 5)
On the other hand, Student had a ‘he was a bright student’ as the ONLY statement working to his advantage, and the rest was speculations of his slipping FYP results and HOW PROF REGRETTED NOT HELPING HIM EARLY ENOUGH. oh… I thought the headlines was on how bright Student was? How come 90% was on the benevolence of Prof?? (Quote 2)
I’m not saying that Student is not at fault (partially or wholly), but I just feel that just cos he is no longer around to tell the side of his story, such reporting that indirectly smears him was unfair. And as to whether it was the Media or you-know-who who activated this smear campaign, well… It’s up to everyone to speculate.
p/s: Below are the articles that I quoted; since I only quoted Straits Times, please note that my view can also be skewed.
- Student stabs prof, falls
- Student was maths ‘genius’
- Well respected by students
- Signs of violent struggle
- Stabbed prof in good spirits
Hi, to add to your point #3: the student is the former club president in the main committee for NTU Cyber Games Club. And I agree that the term “LONER” is not really justified in various ways. However you must understand the societal norms and media cultural policy in Singapore.
Let me shed some light over some areas of your argument:
1) Professor. Singapore *needs* these people. As you mentioned in #1, yes it is true, but I agree only to a certain extent. In order to fully grasp the internal policies and regulations of NTU, you must understand the ‘invisible hand’ the government plays in educational institutes in Singapore. (CF: A clear example would be NTU’s chronicle paper being censored on the issue of the opposition party visiting Singapore). As much as NTU would like to address the situation fully and release an accurate news to the public, government intervention WILL ALWAYS be a factor of consideration. All S’poreans serve the Army (as did I), if you did too, you would know the underlying reasons behind the media and its “accuracy”.
2) I guess this element is open to speculation. There is no concrete proof of the intertwining factors involved. Thus, it’s not about NTU’s image, but the governmental facade that NTU shadows. The scholarship endorser was also not published as well as the terms of scholarship “revocation” was not highlighted. We can’t speculate yet who’s wrong or who’s credible or any institutional decline of credibility.
3) It’s very true that he’s an ex president of NTU Cyber Games Club. But the media using that, is from a motive. A motive to blind the public from the actual event and digress the attention to something else, painting a dull picture of the student. Friends’ comments would not be entirely justified in terms of media publishing (If you’ve taken any communications studies module) and the degree/extent of symbolic capital using “misinterpretation” is a political apparatus of the government. Think about it. Get the picture?
4) from your statement, quote: “nd the rest was speculations of his slipping FYP results and HOW PROF REGRETTED NOT HELPING HIM EARLY ENOUGH. oh… I thought the headlines was on how bright Student was? How come 90% was on the benevolence of Prof??”
–> I reiterate my point 1 again. And in fact, if you’ve downloaded the Dean’s list for EEE, it is true that his grades was slipping gradually. But I agree with your sentence that much positive ambience is given to the professor instead. You must understand the term, “RATIONALITY”. View this objectively, if you’re a NTU PR officer or a government PR representative, the implications of “deputy-director of Bio-engineering” vs. Student will speak for itself. This is the situational existential crisis the world is facing today.
It’s not just in NTU nor in SIngapore, but practiced throughout the world. I regret these incidents have happened in NTU, but the second suicide that recently happened was more of a cowardice act. Singapore’s economy in 2009 is bleak, as well as the job market. 2nd Upper class Hons student can’t find a job, sheesh. It’s gonna be a bad year.
I hope everything’s fine with you. Thank you for sharing and I hope you won’t see my comment as a negative post but rather in a academic debate of intellectual reason.
Cheers.
Min
*blown over* I feel flattered for the long reply; I always wanted to engage in such discussions so that I can improve on my way of inspecting matters at hand. thanx for showing me your view
btw, I still think that the media (with invisible hand) or not is not being responsible by using biased reporting methods. casual bloggers like me can afford to be ambiguous, but as long as they belong to the mass media, they shd be clear of their responsibilities.