THE closure of The Real Singapore (TRS) has certainly raised eyebrows and provoked much discussion ("Socio-political site shut down on MDA's orders"; Monday).
Already, this move might seem counterproductive, since other alternative sites have either emerged or stepped up their presence, rapidly filling the void left by TRS.
Are there other ways of dealing with irresponsible news providers?
First, public education, both through the mass media and in schools, could go some way in encouraging the public to be more discerning when it comes to deciding whether a piece of news is reliable or not.
For instance, the public could be encouraged to think critically and to ask tough questions, seeking and examining information from multiple sources on issues that matter to them, and to assess the possibility of bias in the reportage of a piece of news.
For example, knowing who the editor is could go some way towards establishing the credibility of a news provider.
This knowledge will allow the conscientious reader to realise if there are potential conflicts of interest or hidden agendas that may influence how a piece of news is presented.
Second, mainstream news providers could consider making more of their content more accessible, so that readers can have more balanced options of news online.
Third, the quality of reporting could be improved. For a start, news providers should avoid the use of sensational headlines or ones that may inadvertently induce bias in a reader who, for instance, may not have the time to digest an entire article.
This step would weigh positively towards convincing the public of the objectivity of a news report.
Daniel Ng Peng Keat (Dr)
