On March 1, a reader's letter published in Lianhe Zaobao's Forum page with the headline “Feedback from readers taken seriously” caught my eye. He cited a number of suggestions he made through the Forum page of Zaobao which received swift responses from the authorities and quick follow-up actions to back his observation.
His own experiences led him to conclude that：“This is a good illustration of the democratic system at work in Singapore. Newspapers provide the avenues for people to air their views and these are taken seriously by the authorities which act promptly to find solutions to problems”。
At first glance, the letter appears only to affirm the positive and effective communication between government departments and the people. What should not be overlooked, however, is that underpinning this virtuous circle is the credibility of the media.
To begin with, the people must have faith in the media for them to bring up problems and issues in the belief that when their concerns are highlighted in the press, the authorities will remedy the situation. This is evidence of the credibility that the press enjoys among the people.
Similarly, the government, well aware of the influence newspapers have over its readers, pays close attention to reports, comments and views in the press. And ministries or departments will investigate and deal with problems that come under their purview in a speedy manner. This shows that the government respects the media and believes the concerns expressed by the man in the street are genuine.
It is the duty of the media to keep the people informed of government policies and major events as well as provide accurate feedback to the government on the problems and hardships the people face.
The media acts as a bridge between the government and the people and should seek to make each aware of the concerns of the other and establish an effective channel of communication between them. This is also the process by which the media develops its credibility.
To win the trust of the people and strengthen its hand, the government should keep abreast of the changing needs of the people and help them overcome problems that they have to grapple with.
An open and democratic government should respect the right of the people to have access to information. It should, for example, explain to them the rationale for changing an important policy or the reasons for a major event that has taken place. The information should be timely, accurate and as comprehensive as possible.
The government should also have its ear to the ground to have a good grasp of how the people feel and what they need. The media is the most important means through which to achieve this.
Every serious news provider seeks to be credible and the process of achieving this is an arduous one.
Cable News Network or CNN, for instance, has invested tremendous human and other resources over the years to extend its tentacles worldwide to bring real-time news from every part of the world to its viewers.
The US Central Intelligence Agency or CIA had no clues at all when a coup took place in the Kremlin in 1991. It was the CNN which brought the full drama of the successful attempt to seize power to the viewers.
CNN's ability to keep up with such high-quality reporting has won it worldwide credibility.
While it requires hard work to build up credibility, it takes little effort to ruin it.
For instance, anti-Thai riots broke up in Cambodia at the end of January, resulting in death, injury and severe damage to property. Bangkok suspended most of its ties with Phnom Penh and anti-Cambodian sentiments ran high in Thailand.
The cause of the tragedy - Cambodian newspaper Rasmei Angkor （Light Of Angkor） reporting an unverified comment by popular Thai actress Suvanant Kongying that “Cambodia has stolen Angkor Wat from Thailand”。
This is an example of how the abuse of public trust in the media can have serious consequences that may not be redeemable. It will no doubt be an uphill task for the newspaper to restore its credibility.
The effort to establish credibility can be likened to sailing against the current, a failure to forge ahead means the danger of being overwhelmed by the relentless tide.
It has taken the local media here many years to gain its hard-won credibility. It is an invaluable asset that it should continue to build upon.
The reader ended his letter by saying that he hoped “the effective feedback mechanism can be further enhanced”。 My hope is that the media here will cherish and make greater use of its credibility.
（The writer is a sub-editor of Lianhe Zaobao. Translated by Yap Gee Poh.）
3月1日《聯(lián)合早報(bào)。交流》版刊登了一篇來稿,題為《讀者的話管用》。這位讀者列舉了幾次通過早報(bào)提出建議,都迅速得到政府有關(guān)部門的回應(yīng),并及時(shí)解決了問題。
他由親身經(jīng)歷認(rèn)識(shí)到,“這是新加坡民主社會(huì)的一個(gè)側(cè)影,報(bào)紙支持人民說話,人民在報(bào)紙上公開提出的意見受到有關(guān)*的重視,從而使問題能夠及時(shí)得到解決,影響深遠(yuǎn)……”
表面上看,這篇來稿只是反映了政府有關(guān)*與民眾之間的良性溝通。然而如果深入分析,就會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)這種良性溝通的背后,其實(shí)是以媒體的公信力作為橋梁的。
首先,民眾必須相信媒體敢于為民請命,會(huì)把民生疾苦反映出來,才有可能把周遭發(fā)生的一些問題與狀況反映給媒體,希望通過媒體這個(gè)“擴(kuò)音器”,引起有關(guān)*的重視,從而使問題得到解決。這是媒體公信力在民眾一方的體現(xiàn)。
相應(yīng)的,政府則因清楚了解媒體在民眾中的影響力,才會(huì)隨時(shí)關(guān)注媒體上出現(xiàn)的相關(guān)報(bào)道、反映和言論,一旦出現(xiàn)與己有關(guān)的問題,相關(guān)部門就進(jìn)一步進(jìn)行查證,并力求迅速完滿地解決問題。這是政府相信媒體權(quán)威性,相信媒體讀者言論真實(shí)性的體現(xiàn)。
從傳播學(xué)角度來說,媒體有責(zé)任向民眾傳達(dá)政府的各項(xiàng)政策法規(guī)及重大事件,同時(shí)也應(yīng)如實(shí)把民生疾苦反映給政府。
媒體作為政府與民眾之間的橋梁,應(yīng)該是雙向的,既要做到上情下達(dá),也要做到下情上達(dá),使政府與民眾之間形成一種良性溝通,由此樹立媒體的公信力；政府則應(yīng)通過媒體傾聽民眾的聲音,了解民眾需求,并本著真誠服務(wù)民眾的精神,及時(shí)有效地解決問題,這樣才能取信于民,從而樹立起政府自身的威信。
一個(gè)開明、民主的政府,應(yīng)該重視公眾的知情權(quán),并及時(shí)、真實(shí)和盡可能完整地向公眾解釋最新發(fā)生的重大事件與政策走向的轉(zhuǎn)變；同時(shí)注意聆聽民眾的聲音,盡力去了解民眾的感受與需求。而媒體正是達(dá)成這一目的最重要的途徑。
公信力是每一個(gè)嚴(yán)肅媒體的不懈追求。公信力的樹立更是一個(gè)艱難的過程。美國有線新聞網(wǎng)（CNN）多年來投入大量人力物力,觸角遍及世界每個(gè)角落,力求把當(dāng)?shù)匕l(fā)生的新聞以最快速度報(bào)道給大眾。
1991年克里姆林宮發(fā)生巨變時(shí),美國中央情報(bào)局事前都毫無警訊,可是CNN卻在第一時(shí)間把事件呈現(xiàn)在大眾面前。它長時(shí)間持續(xù)這樣優(yōu)異的表現(xiàn),才能贏得今天的全球公信力。
公信力的樹立如此艱難,要破壞它卻是輕而易舉。濫用公信力造成的傷害更是無法彌補(bǔ)。
今年1月底,在柬埔寨發(fā)生的反泰*,不但造成人命傷亡和財(cái)物損失,也使泰國斷絕了與柬埔寨之間的大部分聯(lián)系。同時(shí),泰國國內(nèi)也掀起了反對柬人的活動(dòng)。
這一悲劇的起因,不過是柬埔寨《吳哥之光》未經(jīng)查證就刊登了泰國電視紅星素瓦南的一句話,“柬埔寨盜走了我的吳哥窟”。
《吳哥之光》濫用媒體公信力,造成了不可收拾的局面。我們也很難想像,《吳哥之光》今后需要花費(fèi)多大的努力,才能重新樹立起它的公信力？
由此可見,公信力的樹立就像逆水行舟,一篙不及將一瀉千里。我們的媒體經(jīng)過多年努力,樹立起一定的公信力,這是最值得慶幸與珍惜的。媒體在珍惜這一寶貴財(cái)富的同時(shí),更應(yīng)致力于不斷加強(qiáng)它的范圍與力度。就像這位讀者在來稿最后提到的“我認(rèn)為這件事意義很大,影響深遠(yuǎn),希望今后這樣的機(jī)制繼續(xù)發(fā)揚(yáng)光大?！?BR> 我們也都這樣希望！
His own experiences led him to conclude that：“This is a good illustration of the democratic system at work in Singapore. Newspapers provide the avenues for people to air their views and these are taken seriously by the authorities which act promptly to find solutions to problems”。
At first glance, the letter appears only to affirm the positive and effective communication between government departments and the people. What should not be overlooked, however, is that underpinning this virtuous circle is the credibility of the media.
To begin with, the people must have faith in the media for them to bring up problems and issues in the belief that when their concerns are highlighted in the press, the authorities will remedy the situation. This is evidence of the credibility that the press enjoys among the people.
Similarly, the government, well aware of the influence newspapers have over its readers, pays close attention to reports, comments and views in the press. And ministries or departments will investigate and deal with problems that come under their purview in a speedy manner. This shows that the government respects the media and believes the concerns expressed by the man in the street are genuine.
It is the duty of the media to keep the people informed of government policies and major events as well as provide accurate feedback to the government on the problems and hardships the people face.
The media acts as a bridge between the government and the people and should seek to make each aware of the concerns of the other and establish an effective channel of communication between them. This is also the process by which the media develops its credibility.
To win the trust of the people and strengthen its hand, the government should keep abreast of the changing needs of the people and help them overcome problems that they have to grapple with.
An open and democratic government should respect the right of the people to have access to information. It should, for example, explain to them the rationale for changing an important policy or the reasons for a major event that has taken place. The information should be timely, accurate and as comprehensive as possible.
The government should also have its ear to the ground to have a good grasp of how the people feel and what they need. The media is the most important means through which to achieve this.
Every serious news provider seeks to be credible and the process of achieving this is an arduous one.
Cable News Network or CNN, for instance, has invested tremendous human and other resources over the years to extend its tentacles worldwide to bring real-time news from every part of the world to its viewers.
The US Central Intelligence Agency or CIA had no clues at all when a coup took place in the Kremlin in 1991. It was the CNN which brought the full drama of the successful attempt to seize power to the viewers.
CNN's ability to keep up with such high-quality reporting has won it worldwide credibility.
While it requires hard work to build up credibility, it takes little effort to ruin it.
For instance, anti-Thai riots broke up in Cambodia at the end of January, resulting in death, injury and severe damage to property. Bangkok suspended most of its ties with Phnom Penh and anti-Cambodian sentiments ran high in Thailand.
The cause of the tragedy - Cambodian newspaper Rasmei Angkor （Light Of Angkor） reporting an unverified comment by popular Thai actress Suvanant Kongying that “Cambodia has stolen Angkor Wat from Thailand”。
This is an example of how the abuse of public trust in the media can have serious consequences that may not be redeemable. It will no doubt be an uphill task for the newspaper to restore its credibility.
The effort to establish credibility can be likened to sailing against the current, a failure to forge ahead means the danger of being overwhelmed by the relentless tide.
It has taken the local media here many years to gain its hard-won credibility. It is an invaluable asset that it should continue to build upon.
The reader ended his letter by saying that he hoped “the effective feedback mechanism can be further enhanced”。 My hope is that the media here will cherish and make greater use of its credibility.
（The writer is a sub-editor of Lianhe Zaobao. Translated by Yap Gee Poh.）
3月1日《聯(lián)合早報(bào)。交流》版刊登了一篇來稿,題為《讀者的話管用》。這位讀者列舉了幾次通過早報(bào)提出建議,都迅速得到政府有關(guān)部門的回應(yīng),并及時(shí)解決了問題。
他由親身經(jīng)歷認(rèn)識(shí)到,“這是新加坡民主社會(huì)的一個(gè)側(cè)影,報(bào)紙支持人民說話,人民在報(bào)紙上公開提出的意見受到有關(guān)*的重視,從而使問題能夠及時(shí)得到解決,影響深遠(yuǎn)……”
表面上看,這篇來稿只是反映了政府有關(guān)*與民眾之間的良性溝通。然而如果深入分析,就會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)這種良性溝通的背后,其實(shí)是以媒體的公信力作為橋梁的。
首先,民眾必須相信媒體敢于為民請命,會(huì)把民生疾苦反映出來,才有可能把周遭發(fā)生的一些問題與狀況反映給媒體,希望通過媒體這個(gè)“擴(kuò)音器”,引起有關(guān)*的重視,從而使問題得到解決。這是媒體公信力在民眾一方的體現(xiàn)。
相應(yīng)的,政府則因清楚了解媒體在民眾中的影響力,才會(huì)隨時(shí)關(guān)注媒體上出現(xiàn)的相關(guān)報(bào)道、反映和言論,一旦出現(xiàn)與己有關(guān)的問題,相關(guān)部門就進(jìn)一步進(jìn)行查證,并力求迅速完滿地解決問題。這是政府相信媒體權(quán)威性,相信媒體讀者言論真實(shí)性的體現(xiàn)。
從傳播學(xué)角度來說,媒體有責(zé)任向民眾傳達(dá)政府的各項(xiàng)政策法規(guī)及重大事件,同時(shí)也應(yīng)如實(shí)把民生疾苦反映給政府。
媒體作為政府與民眾之間的橋梁,應(yīng)該是雙向的,既要做到上情下達(dá),也要做到下情上達(dá),使政府與民眾之間形成一種良性溝通,由此樹立媒體的公信力；政府則應(yīng)通過媒體傾聽民眾的聲音,了解民眾需求,并本著真誠服務(wù)民眾的精神,及時(shí)有效地解決問題,這樣才能取信于民,從而樹立起政府自身的威信。
一個(gè)開明、民主的政府,應(yīng)該重視公眾的知情權(quán),并及時(shí)、真實(shí)和盡可能完整地向公眾解釋最新發(fā)生的重大事件與政策走向的轉(zhuǎn)變；同時(shí)注意聆聽民眾的聲音,盡力去了解民眾的感受與需求。而媒體正是達(dá)成這一目的最重要的途徑。
公信力是每一個(gè)嚴(yán)肅媒體的不懈追求。公信力的樹立更是一個(gè)艱難的過程。美國有線新聞網(wǎng)（CNN）多年來投入大量人力物力,觸角遍及世界每個(gè)角落,力求把當(dāng)?shù)匕l(fā)生的新聞以最快速度報(bào)道給大眾。
1991年克里姆林宮發(fā)生巨變時(shí),美國中央情報(bào)局事前都毫無警訊,可是CNN卻在第一時(shí)間把事件呈現(xiàn)在大眾面前。它長時(shí)間持續(xù)這樣優(yōu)異的表現(xiàn),才能贏得今天的全球公信力。
公信力的樹立如此艱難,要破壞它卻是輕而易舉。濫用公信力造成的傷害更是無法彌補(bǔ)。
今年1月底,在柬埔寨發(fā)生的反泰*,不但造成人命傷亡和財(cái)物損失,也使泰國斷絕了與柬埔寨之間的大部分聯(lián)系。同時(shí),泰國國內(nèi)也掀起了反對柬人的活動(dòng)。
這一悲劇的起因,不過是柬埔寨《吳哥之光》未經(jīng)查證就刊登了泰國電視紅星素瓦南的一句話,“柬埔寨盜走了我的吳哥窟”。
《吳哥之光》濫用媒體公信力,造成了不可收拾的局面。我們也很難想像,《吳哥之光》今后需要花費(fèi)多大的努力,才能重新樹立起它的公信力？
由此可見,公信力的樹立就像逆水行舟,一篙不及將一瀉千里。我們的媒體經(jīng)過多年努力,樹立起一定的公信力,這是最值得慶幸與珍惜的。媒體在珍惜這一寶貴財(cái)富的同時(shí),更應(yīng)致力于不斷加強(qiáng)它的范圍與力度。就像這位讀者在來稿最后提到的“我認(rèn)為這件事意義很大,影響深遠(yuǎn),希望今后這樣的機(jī)制繼續(xù)發(fā)揚(yáng)光大?！?BR> 我們也都這樣希望！