Whew! What a day! Four comedy shows, and all were terrific. It also meant lots and lots of walking around and queuing and trying to follow the maps.
Edinburgh I am slowly falling in love with. I can understand why people think it's like New Zealand and the weather is often dodgy. But the people here are so friendly and the Scottish accent is so pleasant to listen to. Perhaps that's what I like about the people, the accent that I could bathe in.
The city has, if I believe the publicity, about 2000 performers here for the various parts of the Edinburgh Festival. Comedy gets the big numbers though the Edinburgh Tattoo is also here. And there is also plenty of theatre and music and a book festival too. But these are a little dwarfed by the comedy.
I spend the afternoon at two recordings of Just A Minute, the BBC comedy game show which I love. Nicholas Parsons hosts this and the panels feature Paul Merton, Gyles Brandreth, Shappi Khorsandi, Alun Cochrane, Jason Byrne and Russell Kane. Paul is a big name in Britain and a masterful improviser. Gyles is a great raconteur and a good foil for Paul. The others are less experienced at the game but all have their moments. I really enjoy the shows.
Next up for me is a great name of 50 years of comedy, Barry Cryer. He's sitting on a big armchair, now 76, telling a great collection of old jokes. It's less a coherent show than a performance but Baz has an easy rapport with his mainly elderly audience, and the jokes are pretty good.
I then walk across Edinburgh to the next performance. One good thing about being on holiday is that it compels me to walk. I have put on too much weight recently and the need to walk to places is a very good thing, even if I don't always enjoy it at the time.
The last show today features the comedian Jason Byrne. An Irishman, he's sort of got an original take on audience interaction as he makes jokes out of their banalities. Someone says they come from "Crimond" in an accent and he'll get 10 minutes out of it. Add in what must have been surely at least 300 utterings of the F-word and that's his act. He is a clever witty man and his manic persona and anger are also good fun. It's a different sort of stand-up routine and I did like it.
He had a huge crowd to watch it and I had to queue to get in which I am not a great fan of. I took out my book and read it in the queue but put it away after someone suggested there were not many people reading biographies of Edward Heath in the queues to comedy shows in Edinburgh. What I noticed in this queue - and to be fair - others - was how much the I-phone and related objects has now become ubiquitous. I have a relatively new mobile phone - just bought it last year - but it is so out-of-date really compared with the new gadgrety. I was on a flight in New Zealand a few weeks ago and the guy beside me, the chief executive of a biggish and well-known company, spent the hour working on emails and texts from subordinates the whole time he was on the flight. In this queue the woman in front of me spent the entire half hour sending messages backwards and forwards - some of then at least with the person beside her in the queue. But everyone texts and emails madly these days. I'm old enough to remember when yakking into mobile phones was regarded as a sign you were a wanker. Of course they don't talk into them much any more. It's said the next development in computers will be that they will all be the size of your hand. I'm not sure about watching videos that size - but like my mobile, I am probably out of date.
Monday, August 15, 2011
Day 6 August 13th - London - Edinburgh
In Scotland for the Festival. I've been here just one time before. I spend most of my first day here organising the rest of the time here.
The hotel I am staying at is a bit out of town - at Leith on the banks of the Firth of Forth. The Malmaison is described as the best place to stay in the city by the comedian Marcus Brigstocke today. It is great to be by the water and it is only 10 minutes into the centre of the city. It is a beautiful hotel and the people are astonishingly friendly. Even the visitor information is written in a human way.
And yes! It has a bath, which is designed for an adult and where it has separate hot and cold taps with good pressure. This may seem obvious and perhaps it is, but it's not all that common. Annoyingly though it has a glass partition, designed to stop water from showers spraying on to the bathroom floor, but this for me, means I have to jump into the bath to turn the taps on. Don't most people try to run a bath from the outside of it?
One of the pleasures of being on holiday is a hearty breakfast. A good breakfast is surely the most pleasant meal of the day, and sets me up, as I miss other meals till the evening. At home I don't always have breakfast as I am often working at 5am and my stomach can't bear the thought of food at 4am. Perhaps I will have to change my habits as I'm sure it can't be healthy to come home after work, make myself a sandwich and have a nap, as I often do.
The hotel I am staying at is a bit out of town - at Leith on the banks of the Firth of Forth. The Malmaison is described as the best place to stay in the city by the comedian Marcus Brigstocke today. It is great to be by the water and it is only 10 minutes into the centre of the city. It is a beautiful hotel and the people are astonishingly friendly. Even the visitor information is written in a human way.
And yes! It has a bath, which is designed for an adult and where it has separate hot and cold taps with good pressure. This may seem obvious and perhaps it is, but it's not all that common. Annoyingly though it has a glass partition, designed to stop water from showers spraying on to the bathroom floor, but this for me, means I have to jump into the bath to turn the taps on. Don't most people try to run a bath from the outside of it?
One of the pleasures of being on holiday is a hearty breakfast. A good breakfast is surely the most pleasant meal of the day, and sets me up, as I miss other meals till the evening. At home I don't always have breakfast as I am often working at 5am and my stomach can't bear the thought of food at 4am. Perhaps I will have to change my habits as I'm sure it can't be healthy to come home after work, make myself a sandwich and have a nap, as I often do.
Day 5 - August 12th - London
My last day in London for now. Tomorrow I get up early - if not quite as early as I do at home - to travel to Edinburgh.
I spend most of the day catching up with people, and keeping an eye on the cricket. I write this knowing the result as I write several days later.
I had thought the third test was the last in the series and being played at The Oval in South London, and it was annoying to find that it was being played in Birmingham with a fourth test to come. Still the Oval test is on when I am back in London next week and I hope to get a ticket to see some of it.
England has been thrashing India and as I write this have been confirmed as the world's best test team. The computer has some statisitical system which works this out depending on how many other teams you have beaten and of course you acknowledge the great achievement. It is not that long ago that England consistently had promising teams that under-achieved, playing below their best. The current team plays well above their ability, in a way that seems a bit similar to the New Zealand team of the 80s. Players like Coney, Chatfield, Wright, Bracewell and Snedden were by no means great players but they gave of their best consistently.
But of course New Zealand did have two genuine world-beaters in Richard Hadlee and Martin Crowe. At their very best, both were unstoppable. Hadlee's control of a ball was wonderful to watch. Crowe at his peak could play every shot in the book. We were lucky to have them and it hardly need be said that no New Zealand player has ever come even near to their ability. Don't tell me Fleming or Astle was anywhere near Crowe, or that Shane Bond or Chris Cairns was anywhere near as dangerous or consistent as Hadlee. New Zealand's current best player, Daniel Vettori, while admirable in so many ways, has notably failed to win many tests, even when in a position to do so.
I digress because it seems to me that the current English team lacks players who will be memorable in years to come. It lacks real stars. The opening batsman, Alastair Cook, plays with incredible concentration and determination, and any side, certainly including New Zealand, would love him in their team. But when a man plays for six hours, is in total command, against very ordinary bowling, and can score just seven fours all day, you can't help but wonder.
Graeme Swann, supposedly the best spinner in the world, is a player I seem to have bad luck with, as he never seems to bowl all that well when I am watching. He is certainly no match for the previous generation of spinners, Warne, Murali, Kumble.
The interest in cricket here seems remarkably high despite it no longer appearing on free-to-air TV. On radio, the TMS team is still strong. Geoffrey Boycott and Vic Marks are very good summarisers and the new men Michael Vaughan and Philip Tuffnell are developing. Of the ball-by-ball men, Jonathan Agnew is outstanding both as a broadcaster and commentator and as a fair-minded analyst. It's fun listening to Agnew as he weaves in other subjects without neglecting the cricket.
Henry Blofeld is still good fun too but he seems to me to be a bit slow in describing play these day. Key moments are decsribed firstly with the words "oh I say!" which aren't especially descriptive. He must surely retire soon. Christopher Martin-Jenkins is a masterful describer of the action but always seems a bit pompous. At one point the other day Agnew pointed out there were several people in the ground dressed as Mr Blobby and wondered about the word for a collective of Blobbies. The diversion didn't go on too long, about two minutes, and was good fun for the listener.
About 10 minutes later, Christopher Martin-Jenkins was on, and can surely not have heard Agnew's words. "There are several people in the ground in fancy dress - how ridiculous - surely the cricket is interesting enough for them!" he proclaimed. Part of describing a day's play at the cricket is describing the atmosphere - not my view but that of CMJ in his own book on cricket commentary.
The TV commentators were rather better than I found them in the past. The decision to appoint only the very best former players, rather than look for skills in broadcasting, can pay off, and can fail. Shane Warne's introduction has been a godsend I am sure - he is both a good thinker on the game and has a good sense of fun. Nasser Hussain gets better and David Lloyd is always good fun to listen to. At the other end of the spectrum, Michael Holding still has a wonderful voice, but if he has ever said anything interesting or thoughtful about the game, I've missed it. And Ian Botham - such an entertainer on the field - is death behind a mike.
If listening to TV commentary I want to hear thoughts I hadn't considered before. Each of the Sky commentators has just three stints per day - surely each could do come up with one original thought per shift. The best - Ian Chappell, Richie Benaud, Boycott, do that. Or they need to be able to communicate their enjoyment of the game - Bill Lawry, Tony Greig, Lloyd. If they are just there because of their feats 30 years ago, well...
I spend most of the day catching up with people, and keeping an eye on the cricket. I write this knowing the result as I write several days later.
I had thought the third test was the last in the series and being played at The Oval in South London, and it was annoying to find that it was being played in Birmingham with a fourth test to come. Still the Oval test is on when I am back in London next week and I hope to get a ticket to see some of it.
England has been thrashing India and as I write this have been confirmed as the world's best test team. The computer has some statisitical system which works this out depending on how many other teams you have beaten and of course you acknowledge the great achievement. It is not that long ago that England consistently had promising teams that under-achieved, playing below their best. The current team plays well above their ability, in a way that seems a bit similar to the New Zealand team of the 80s. Players like Coney, Chatfield, Wright, Bracewell and Snedden were by no means great players but they gave of their best consistently.
But of course New Zealand did have two genuine world-beaters in Richard Hadlee and Martin Crowe. At their very best, both were unstoppable. Hadlee's control of a ball was wonderful to watch. Crowe at his peak could play every shot in the book. We were lucky to have them and it hardly need be said that no New Zealand player has ever come even near to their ability. Don't tell me Fleming or Astle was anywhere near Crowe, or that Shane Bond or Chris Cairns was anywhere near as dangerous or consistent as Hadlee. New Zealand's current best player, Daniel Vettori, while admirable in so many ways, has notably failed to win many tests, even when in a position to do so.
I digress because it seems to me that the current English team lacks players who will be memorable in years to come. It lacks real stars. The opening batsman, Alastair Cook, plays with incredible concentration and determination, and any side, certainly including New Zealand, would love him in their team. But when a man plays for six hours, is in total command, against very ordinary bowling, and can score just seven fours all day, you can't help but wonder.
Graeme Swann, supposedly the best spinner in the world, is a player I seem to have bad luck with, as he never seems to bowl all that well when I am watching. He is certainly no match for the previous generation of spinners, Warne, Murali, Kumble.
The interest in cricket here seems remarkably high despite it no longer appearing on free-to-air TV. On radio, the TMS team is still strong. Geoffrey Boycott and Vic Marks are very good summarisers and the new men Michael Vaughan and Philip Tuffnell are developing. Of the ball-by-ball men, Jonathan Agnew is outstanding both as a broadcaster and commentator and as a fair-minded analyst. It's fun listening to Agnew as he weaves in other subjects without neglecting the cricket.
Henry Blofeld is still good fun too but he seems to me to be a bit slow in describing play these day. Key moments are decsribed firstly with the words "oh I say!" which aren't especially descriptive. He must surely retire soon. Christopher Martin-Jenkins is a masterful describer of the action but always seems a bit pompous. At one point the other day Agnew pointed out there were several people in the ground dressed as Mr Blobby and wondered about the word for a collective of Blobbies. The diversion didn't go on too long, about two minutes, and was good fun for the listener.
About 10 minutes later, Christopher Martin-Jenkins was on, and can surely not have heard Agnew's words. "There are several people in the ground in fancy dress - how ridiculous - surely the cricket is interesting enough for them!" he proclaimed. Part of describing a day's play at the cricket is describing the atmosphere - not my view but that of CMJ in his own book on cricket commentary.
The TV commentators were rather better than I found them in the past. The decision to appoint only the very best former players, rather than look for skills in broadcasting, can pay off, and can fail. Shane Warne's introduction has been a godsend I am sure - he is both a good thinker on the game and has a good sense of fun. Nasser Hussain gets better and David Lloyd is always good fun to listen to. At the other end of the spectrum, Michael Holding still has a wonderful voice, but if he has ever said anything interesting or thoughtful about the game, I've missed it. And Ian Botham - such an entertainer on the field - is death behind a mike.
If listening to TV commentary I want to hear thoughts I hadn't considered before. Each of the Sky commentators has just three stints per day - surely each could do come up with one original thought per shift. The best - Ian Chappell, Richie Benaud, Boycott, do that. Or they need to be able to communicate their enjoyment of the game - Bill Lawry, Tony Greig, Lloyd. If they are just there because of their feats 30 years ago, well...
Day 4 - August 11th - London
I failed just one exam at school - Art History in the 6th form. I wasn't any good at art but I liked the idea of learning about paintings and architecture and so on. It was an abysmal failure. I walked out of the exam after an hour having scored just 24. I don't really remember now why I wasn't any good at it. The teacher was uninspiring but that shouldn't have mattered, I should have been able to master it.
Especially because as I grow older, I am more and more drawn to art. When I am on holiday a journey around museums and art galleries is usually part of what I am up to, and of course there's a fair bit to see in London. Today I spent half the day on a dawdle around the National Portrait Gallery. I love looking at paintings and photographs of the famous historical figures of the past. It's very well done at the Gallery, with short biographies of all the people juxtaposed with the portraits.
Someone cleverer than me will be able to explain the attraction of paintings of people. I don't say I'm not interested at all at paintings of scenery but paintings of people and historical events seem to me to say a lot more. Some bear looking at for 10 minutes or so, there is so much to notice about them. There was one of the trial of Queen Caroline, unforunate wife of King George IV. The couple are said to have separated just two days after the wedding, and she only returned to England when he came to the throne. She was then the subject of a long pseudo-trial in the House of Lords on charges of adultery. She was not acquitted but the bill that would have deprived her of the role of Queen Consort was not passed. The portrait of the Lords debate has about 200 people in it and it's enjoyable studying the various reactions.
Architecture also interests me and I find the buildings here in Britain very interesting. After having been in Christchurch just a few weeks ago, I can't help feeling that similar-sized earthquakes here would have a devestating effect, much worse than in Christchurch where buildings were more modern. Of course I am no building engineer, but it all looks old and creaky. The cobbles everywhere make for an interesting time in a cab as drivers seem to insist on driving at breakneck speed down busy city streets.
London is not a beautiful city and the attempts to keep cars out of the city seem to me to make it not very people-friendly either. Of course the bus and the Tube make it quite simple to get around, but still, being able to drive your own car into town makes like so much more simple for people individually, if not collectively.
Have just been looking for a nice quote about art to finish with. Here's one from the great cartoonist Scott Adams - "creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep."
Especially because as I grow older, I am more and more drawn to art. When I am on holiday a journey around museums and art galleries is usually part of what I am up to, and of course there's a fair bit to see in London. Today I spent half the day on a dawdle around the National Portrait Gallery. I love looking at paintings and photographs of the famous historical figures of the past. It's very well done at the Gallery, with short biographies of all the people juxtaposed with the portraits.
Someone cleverer than me will be able to explain the attraction of paintings of people. I don't say I'm not interested at all at paintings of scenery but paintings of people and historical events seem to me to say a lot more. Some bear looking at for 10 minutes or so, there is so much to notice about them. There was one of the trial of Queen Caroline, unforunate wife of King George IV. The couple are said to have separated just two days after the wedding, and she only returned to England when he came to the throne. She was then the subject of a long pseudo-trial in the House of Lords on charges of adultery. She was not acquitted but the bill that would have deprived her of the role of Queen Consort was not passed. The portrait of the Lords debate has about 200 people in it and it's enjoyable studying the various reactions.
Architecture also interests me and I find the buildings here in Britain very interesting. After having been in Christchurch just a few weeks ago, I can't help feeling that similar-sized earthquakes here would have a devestating effect, much worse than in Christchurch where buildings were more modern. Of course I am no building engineer, but it all looks old and creaky. The cobbles everywhere make for an interesting time in a cab as drivers seem to insist on driving at breakneck speed down busy city streets.
London is not a beautiful city and the attempts to keep cars out of the city seem to me to make it not very people-friendly either. Of course the bus and the Tube make it quite simple to get around, but still, being able to drive your own car into town makes like so much more simple for people individually, if not collectively.
Have just been looking for a nice quote about art to finish with. Here's one from the great cartoonist Scott Adams - "creativity is allowing yourself to make mistakes. Art is knowing which ones to keep."
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Day 3 - August 10th - London
I was at the Comedy Store tonight watching the Comedy Store Players. I've loved improvised comedy since the days of Whose Line Is It Anyway. And if anyone remembers those days, the team I am watching features some Whose Line alumni - Josie Lawrence, Richard Vranch, Steve Frost, Neil Mullarkey and Lee Simpson, together with Ian Coppinger who I wasn't really aware of previously, but was damn good.
I used to have a schoolboy crush on Josie and she is still gorgeous and very funny as well as having a great voice. One of those people that just seems to have too much talent. As well as improv she is a dramatic actress too. She seemed to me to be having a great time of it.
The Comedy Store venue is one of those venues that is just as you might imagine it - dark, underground, intimate, everyone but me (including the performers) have a beer in hand. Not so long ago it was probably smoky too.
Neil Mullarkey teaches people to do improv and I believe he maintains that anyone can be taught to do it. He would know but it still looks an impossible feat. The subject that interests me more than any other is the creative process and I would love to hear him explain how he develops his ideas.
I am appalling at remembering punchlines and I can't now remember the best jokes of the night. But it was well worth it and it was lovely to see Steve and Josie in particular. I have only been once before to the Players and on that occasion the cast was Richard, Neil, Lee, Paul Merton, Tony Slattery and Phelim McDermott. That too was a very funny show.
Funnily enough, the riots didn't get a mention...
I used to have a schoolboy crush on Josie and she is still gorgeous and very funny as well as having a great voice. One of those people that just seems to have too much talent. As well as improv she is a dramatic actress too. She seemed to me to be having a great time of it.
The Comedy Store venue is one of those venues that is just as you might imagine it - dark, underground, intimate, everyone but me (including the performers) have a beer in hand. Not so long ago it was probably smoky too.
Neil Mullarkey teaches people to do improv and I believe he maintains that anyone can be taught to do it. He would know but it still looks an impossible feat. The subject that interests me more than any other is the creative process and I would love to hear him explain how he develops his ideas.
I am appalling at remembering punchlines and I can't now remember the best jokes of the night. But it was well worth it and it was lovely to see Steve and Josie in particular. I have only been once before to the Players and on that occasion the cast was Richard, Neil, Lee, Paul Merton, Tony Slattery and Phelim McDermott. That too was a very funny show.
Funnily enough, the riots didn't get a mention...
Day 2 - August 9th - London
Arriving in London, there is only one subject on the lips of just about everyone, the London riots. At home people seem very worried about my safety. Yet in all my time in London I saw no sign of any damage. That's because I am in the central city whereas the damage is in the suburbs.
That being the case I have no great insight to relay on the subject. I offered to do something for Morning Report and spent some time gathering some information but in the end, they didn't need me and I don't blame them.
The media coverage was very good. I listened a fair bit to the radio and I do think radio comes into its own on these occasions as they can move to different locations with greater flexibility. But the newspaper and TV reporting was good too.
Still I wanted to read some good analysis, to understand what was happening. Of that there was very little. There was plenty of commentary, of course - indeed many papers seem to offer more opinion columns than reporting after the first couple of days. But they were uniformly awful.
If the columnist was on the left, the riots demonstrated how bad the Government's spending cuts were, and how alienated youth are in a time of high unemployment. If the columnist was on the right, the riots showed how PC the police are, how soft the pollies are and how the current crisis has been coming for years because of soft moral leadership.
I like reading columns, but it seems to me that any column has to have an original thought or be based on original research or original reporting. We used to have a columnist at the Evening Post who told us writing columns was simple - he just ranted into a tape recorder for 15 minutes and got his secretary to type it up. That was what every column I read sounded like. They read as if the writer could - and probably had - written the same column many times and just rewritten the intro to talk about the riots.
Take this, written by John McTernan, the lead columnist the other day in the Daily Telegraph. Is there anything in it he has not written before? And despite all the talk of a lack of leadership, he never gets to the point of saying what it was he would have liked the current leadership to do. If I had been his editor, I would have thrown it back at him.
The lack of good commentary is important, I think. Because it is sometimes said that good analysis is what will keep newspapers in particular alive. They can't hope to break much news in the future, in the instantaneous news environment. But people will turn to them for quality analysis. If that is so, readers would have been disappointed this week.
Mind you I do find British politicians - well - too staged. It feels vaguely like you are watching a play about politics, rather than real passionate politics. David Cameron looks and acts like a Prime Minister, but you don't get any feeling that he is truly engaged with what he is saying. Ed Miliband acts like an outraged Opposition leader but doesn't really have anything to say either. Is this the way modern politics works perhaps? Political leaders as the products of communications gurus - the emphasis being on being safe and reassuring. Cameron seems very popular and I doubt he will lose ground over the riots. But I find myself wondering what he really believes and why. What he really cares about, apart from winning. I'd love to know.
Mind you I do find British politicians - well - too staged. It feels vaguely like you are watching a play about politics, rather than real passionate politics. David Cameron looks and acts like a Prime Minister, but you don't get any feeling that he is truly engaged with what he is saying. Ed Miliband acts like an outraged Opposition leader but doesn't really have anything to say either. Is this the way modern politics works perhaps? Political leaders as the products of communications gurus - the emphasis being on being safe and reassuring. Cameron seems very popular and I doubt he will lose ground over the riots. But I find myself wondering what he really believes and why. What he really cares about, apart from winning. I'd love to know.
Day 1 August 8th Auckland-Singapore-London
The man at Wellington Airport sniffs at my flight itinerary. "Only two hours at Singapore? You should really stay there for longer than that!"
I have spent a few days in Singapore. It was a junket when I was working at The Evening Post in 1998. The free trip was to cover Singapore Airlines' launch of the on-flight individual video system, the one where you can choose your own film/TV show - something that is now widespread on long haul flights.
Of course this was not a subject that The Evening Post regarded as front-page news and it was widely seen as a reward for me for my work. I took the opportunity as much as I could to get out of the various functions and look around.
But here was the thing. Journalists from all around the world had been flown to Singapore at the expense of the airline, which was and is owned by the Singapore Government. I think there were about eight of us New Zealanders so you can only imagine how many people from Britain, the US and so on were taken there. On the first day there was a huge presser in this large hall which hundreds of people attended. The Deputy Prime Minister and an airline executive spoke, at length. Questions were allowed but were batted off with platitudes - no follow-ups allowed. They took maybe five questions and then the presser was closed. It was made clear that they were definitely not available for further questioning. No-one else was either.
This made it difficult for me - who had not reported on aviation matters before - to do anything but a puff piece and I found the subject a bore anyway. The rest of the time was spent on dull functions with lots of speeches.
The conclusion I came to was that this wasn't a great place to be a reporter.
Anyway while I was in Singapore on my brief stopover there, I picked up the Straits Times. The big political story was about the current Presidential election. There the Law Minister had made a major speech emphasising that the President was a head of state role equivalent to the Queen, and so could not take an active role in politics. He was speaking because some of the candidates are making it clear that they will try to take an independent role on policy matters in a country where the ruling People's Action Party has been in power since 1959 and currently holds 81 of 87 seats in the Parliament on 60 percent of the vote.
Now some of the independent Presidential candidates had criticised the Law Minister's comments. The Straits Times had given 75 percent of page three to the Law Minister responding to that criticism. This long long long article gave just two sentences to the critics. Just in case that wasn't enough, the op-ed section devoted an entire page to reprinting the Law Minister's original speech in full. And on page four, half a page was given to the news that the Government's preferred candidate Tony Tan had been endorsed by the Tan Clan. In the very last paragraph of this half-page story, the reporter said they had asked Dr Tan about his view of the role of the President and he had replied that it was too complicated a subject for him to discuss with a reporter.
Singapore has a strong economy and a liberal market environment. Why do they feel they cannot put up with the normal rough and tumble of a democracy? Singapore seems to want to madly mimic Western-style democracies but seems afraid of giving its people true democratic choice of which a free media is a part. It doesn't make me keen to return there.
I have spent a few days in Singapore. It was a junket when I was working at The Evening Post in 1998. The free trip was to cover Singapore Airlines' launch of the on-flight individual video system, the one where you can choose your own film/TV show - something that is now widespread on long haul flights.
Of course this was not a subject that The Evening Post regarded as front-page news and it was widely seen as a reward for me for my work. I took the opportunity as much as I could to get out of the various functions and look around.
But here was the thing. Journalists from all around the world had been flown to Singapore at the expense of the airline, which was and is owned by the Singapore Government. I think there were about eight of us New Zealanders so you can only imagine how many people from Britain, the US and so on were taken there. On the first day there was a huge presser in this large hall which hundreds of people attended. The Deputy Prime Minister and an airline executive spoke, at length. Questions were allowed but were batted off with platitudes - no follow-ups allowed. They took maybe five questions and then the presser was closed. It was made clear that they were definitely not available for further questioning. No-one else was either.
This made it difficult for me - who had not reported on aviation matters before - to do anything but a puff piece and I found the subject a bore anyway. The rest of the time was spent on dull functions with lots of speeches.
The conclusion I came to was that this wasn't a great place to be a reporter.
Anyway while I was in Singapore on my brief stopover there, I picked up the Straits Times. The big political story was about the current Presidential election. There the Law Minister had made a major speech emphasising that the President was a head of state role equivalent to the Queen, and so could not take an active role in politics. He was speaking because some of the candidates are making it clear that they will try to take an independent role on policy matters in a country where the ruling People's Action Party has been in power since 1959 and currently holds 81 of 87 seats in the Parliament on 60 percent of the vote.
Now some of the independent Presidential candidates had criticised the Law Minister's comments. The Straits Times had given 75 percent of page three to the Law Minister responding to that criticism. This long long long article gave just two sentences to the critics. Just in case that wasn't enough, the op-ed section devoted an entire page to reprinting the Law Minister's original speech in full. And on page four, half a page was given to the news that the Government's preferred candidate Tony Tan had been endorsed by the Tan Clan. In the very last paragraph of this half-page story, the reporter said they had asked Dr Tan about his view of the role of the President and he had replied that it was too complicated a subject for him to discuss with a reporter.
Singapore has a strong economy and a liberal market environment. Why do they feel they cannot put up with the normal rough and tumble of a democracy? Singapore seems to want to madly mimic Western-style democracies but seems afraid of giving its people true democratic choice of which a free media is a part. It doesn't make me keen to return there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)