NYTimes Has To Apologize, Pay $114k For Mentioning Singapore Had Father/Son Prime Ministers?

from the say-what-now? dept

Mon, Mar 29th 2010 6:27pm — Mike Masnick

The NY Times published an odd sort of "apology" last week, which is now getting a bunch of attention on Twitter:

In 1994, Philip Bowring, a contributor to the International Herald Tribune's op-ed page, agreed as part of an undertaking with the leaders of the government of Singapore that he would not say or imply that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had attained his position through nepotism practiced by his father Lee Kuan Yew. In a February 15, 2010, article, Mr. Bowring nonetheless included these two men in a list of Asian political dynasties, which may have been understood by readers to infer that the younger Mr. Lee did not achieve his position through merit. We wish to state clearly that this inference was not intended. We apologize to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and former Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong for any distress or embarrassment caused by any breach of the undertaking and the article.

There's so much that's bizarre in this short paragraph that it's difficult to know where to start. But, what may be even more bizarre is what the NY Time's apparently left out. According to other reports, the NY Times also paid $114,000 to the father and son (and to a lawyer representing both). Either way, this whole thing is very odd. Why would a reporter for a respectable publication ever agree not to give an opinion on something? And why would the NY Times' cave for merely stating that having a father and son both as prime minister's represents something of a dynasty?

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: apologies, singapore
Companies: nytimes

19 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 29 Mar 2010 @ 6:41pm

So they are extortionist nepotistic prime ministers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- mrtraver (profile), 29 Mar 2010 @ 7:23pm
  
  Re:
  Good thing you posted anonymously, or they would sue you, too!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Dark Helmet (profile), 29 Mar 2010 @ 7:31pm
    
    Re: Re:
    And mike would out you, if he, in his infinite wisdom, peace be upon him and all that, deemed it to be newsworthy....
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Mike Masnick (profile), 29 Mar 2010 @ 8:08pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      And mike would out you, if he, in his infinite wisdom, peace be upon him and all that, deemed it to be newsworthy....
      
      Hey now, we said no such thing. In fact, I said the opposite.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Dark Helmet (profile), 30 Mar 2010 @ 4:42am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Oh relax, I'm just messing with you...
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Headbhang (profile), 30 Mar 2010 @ 2:36am
  
  Re: Spoing
  Gotta love the irony that the apology itself highlights the likely nepotism even more than the original article itself.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
NullOp, 29 Mar 2010 @ 7:39pm

?
Who effing cares!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
justok (profile), 29 Mar 2010 @ 7:54pm

Dynasty may mean more than just winning the last two world series
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Mar 2010 @ 8:09pm

So the lawyer got $110,000 and the extortionist nepotistic prime ministers split $4000. Sweet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bob Bunderfeld (profile), 29 Mar 2010 @ 8:13pm

This is that Country!
Isn't this the Country that actually Jails writers of all types if they ever say anything negative or bad about the Prime Minister?

I believe 60 minutes did a piece on a Writer that wrote a book that apparently spoke ill of the Prime Minister and when he arrived in the Country he was promptly arrested and taken before the Prime Minister so he could grovel and apologize for his misgivings and beg to be forgiven.

Strange place indeed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
diesel mcfadden, 29 Mar 2010 @ 8:26pm

Singapore has very strict defamation laws and strong media control.
IHT violated.

http://www.democracyweb.org/rule/singapore.php
search text for "slander"

http://www.search.com/reference/Slander_and_libel#Singapore_law
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Mar 2010 @ 8:53pm

singapore is a tiny little red dot in asia that badly wants to be taken seriously, which is why they jump at the chance to sue anyone who dare say they ain't a democracy but are just a dictatorship.

they got tons of money, but everyone laughs at them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ray Trygstad (profile), 29 Mar 2010 @ 10:04pm

This is consistant!
Having spent a fair amount of time in Singapore, I can tell you that anything negative written about the government of Singapore by the press anywhere outside of Singapore is considered to be "external interference in the political process of Singapore". They will block distribution of any publication that has committed this offense; in the 80's I saw them do this to Time Magazine. The NY Times may view this market as important enough to preserve their distribution rights by an apology.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Guy Fawkes, 29 Mar 2010 @ 10:24pm

Singapore and defamation
The People's Action Party, the ruling party with 82 out of 84 seats in Parliament, has a standard weapon to use against dissidents. If you are so unwise as to win a seat in parliament, or make disparaging comments, you will be sued into bankruptcy. Singapore still uses the old, English-style, defamation laws in which truth and public benefit are not a sufficient defense. If you expose a member of the PAP as corrupt or incompetent you can be successfully sued since your comments, although true, can cause damage because the person may lose an election. Once bankrupt you are no longer eligible to sit in Parliament.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nick Coghlan (profile), 29 Mar 2010 @ 10:36pm

That's like saying...
...Dubya only became president because his fath... oh, wait...

(Obvious joke is obvious, but I couldn't resist)

On a more serious note, this definitely seems like a classic case of the Streisand effect. I wouldn't even have been able to tell you who the Singaporean prime minister was, let alone that there was a suspicion that he only got the job through paternal influence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Which is why I was glad..., 5 Apr 2010 @ 8:14pm
  
  Re: That's like saying...
  Imagine if Hilary Clinton became president. If so, then the US could have had a 2-family dynasty for 28 years!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Mar 2010 @ 3:18am

William Gibson called Singapore "Disneyland with the Death Penalty." And Wired got banned in Singapore.

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/1.04/gibson.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Mar 2010 @ 6:00am

Gumshoe Fascist
-->You there....Swallow your gum.
We wouldn't want his majesty, King Lee, the Second, to get it stuck on his shoe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spanky, 30 Mar 2010 @ 7:25am

re
Illegitimate, perhaps? My sister, my daughter, my sister,...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]