Week 8 Blog prompt- Repeat of MRT vandalism

I was surprised to see this. Currently the only details are that a train at Bishan depot where upgrading works were scheduled was found vandalised, only one year after the previous one at Changi depot.

But this will get commuters worried. With vandals able to spring surprises on us, what happens when one day the vandal is a terrorist? Surely SMRT cannot say they did not have enough time or resources to beef up security because it was one year between both incidents.

I think such a problem happens when a private company runs a public service. Maybe the management didn't think it necessary to step up measures.

This matter extends beyond security. These vandals do not understand why it is so incomprehensibly wrong to spoil public property. Firstly, it belongs to the state for everyone to use. When you spoil it, you are taking away the government's money, which is stealing, and you are depriving the public of use of the train, which is hoarding, selfishness. And there are more creative ways of art.

The government should get down really hard on these kinds of people. And it should also put it in the newspaper and shame the vandal and warn the public not to do it. Because all this will make any curious parties think twice.

Week 6 Blog Prompt- The media’s unhealthy culture

“The media should be blamed for its unhealthy paparazzi culture and going to the extreme for sensational news, how far do you agree?”

I agree mostly. Of course I have read sensational news; on Yahoo, MSN, the search engine's start page always has news with catchy titles. About sex, money, beauty, common attention-pullers.

The media, as described by Prime Minister of India Manmohan Singh, is "judge, jury and prosecution". I think that means the media likes to find stories and judge the celebrity in question based on the story. Journalists are good at manipulating words. And at first exaggeration and such made the people want to read more. But they did not mind because celebs are high-profile people and royals are important people, and people high on the social strata are known to have little privacy.

The thing about the news media is that everyone can sell the same story, but how many can make it delicious? Take for example the phone-hacking scandal from the News of the World, the British public have shown their disgust over the stories of the murdered girl or dead soldiers. But before NotW got busted, Britons were still reading their paper. How could you mask the moral scent of such a filthy act? Through the power to give the public their articles with your say as final. And authoritative.

I think in Singapore our media is honest enough, although being government controlled, enough is debatable. But in other countries like Britain, independent press has caused this unhealthy culture.

But the public has to be blamed too. This massive invasion of privacy is also caused by photojournalists, or citizens with a camera phone. For example, STOMP, Singapore's gossip portal has its articles in the "Singapore Seen" section collated from pictures taken by the public. Its that kind of kiasuness, or want of censorship, when everyone wants that kick from an exposé . The media is more like the headquarters.

On its own, without demand from readers, the news media would not have such underhanded means to create supply. So the public is fueling the sins of the media.

Week 5 Blog prompt -By the end of the trial scene, do you think true justice and mercy was achieved?

At the end of the trial in Merchant of Venice justice and mercy were achieved, although the genuineness of those achievements are arguable. These must be considered from the points of view of Shylock, the law and the Christians.

Justice may be defined as the quality of being fair and reasonable. When a mother punishes her child for doing something wrong, she is being just. It is reasonable and well within the scope of her duty as a mother to discipline her child, and a punishment is fair.

Mercy may be defined as compassion or forgiveness shown toward someone whom it is within one's power to punish or harm. When a judge decides not to impart life imprisonment out of compassion, he is showing mercy. I am not saying that it may always be the best choice to make, but it is all about compassion and forgiveness.

So why has justice been achieved? Was it true justice? Shylock was punished for his misdeed, although it was Portia who manipulated the law to make him look wrong, and not because he had borne evil intentions. Certainly in the law justice has been achieved. But Shylock had sealed the bond legally and in the end had not laid a finger on Antonio. Did he truly deserve to be punished like this? Although he was offered three chances to grant mercy and show his kingly virtue, he refused. Perhaps he does deserve to be punished, but not in the way he was. So true justice was not achieved. Antonio had some responsibility for taking the bond too. But no punishment was given to him in the end.

But mercy... the Duke spared his life and Antonio did not take half of Shylock's wealth for himself. By sparing him of worst things, they showed mercy to him. However, they did not show him it out of pure compassion. It was more like not letting him have a quick death. They probably wanted him to have a slow painful life. Also Antonio used this opportunity to make Shylock renounce Jewism. Technically mercy was shown, but in terms of compassion and forgiveness we can see this kind of mercy is not born from morals. It is more of a kind of masking revenge with virtue. This is not exactly true mercy.

Then again, what is true? How can we ever judge what is true mercy? If everyone thought Shylock should die, is that justice true? Is trueness based on morals or law?

Thus I conclude that the justice and mercy portrayed in the trial scene is perverted. But having said that, we do not have a measure to check how true something is. Thus, it can only be left to oneself to make that conclusion.

In real life, Anti-Corruption Commission investigations manager, Sukai Tongogara, confirmed to The Zimbabwean this week that the commission had received complaints against some individuals at all levels of the judicial system. Magistrates, prosecutors, clerks of court, legal practitioners, officers of the Labour Court, traditional chiefs and judges are all involved. We can see how perverted justice is.