Are you getting the full story?

I happen to read this story/advertisement ‘Are you getting the full story?’ in the 15 Nov 2008 issue of Today. The content is mainly about the removal of information by The Straits Times (ST) and LianHe ZhaoBao (LHZB) forum in Today’s reply to the concerns of newspaper vendors in regards to Today paper’s advertisement on not needing to pay for information (from other paid newspapers). The information removed is mainly on  Today’s circulation numbers and how consumers can get home delivery of Today through a monthly service fee which is paid to newspaper vendors. In my opinion, the reason for removal of those information is that it gives Today free advertisement and is detrimental to Singapore Press Holding’s (SPH) newspapers. The information may be non-material in SPH’s views. But I do feel that it does address some of the concerns expressed by the newspaper vendors and is of significance.

Disappointment aside, this development has made me wonder how much information has been removed all this while in SPH’s prints. If Today has not published the original reply, who in the world would have known SPH would do such a thing? ST and LHZB are major dailies held in high regard, not some flamboyant tabloid. Reputation can count for nothing when it comes to protecting one’s own interest.

Similarly, some in the financial advisory industry are well-known figures and are held in high regard. But do they really preach and recommend the correct things? Are what they preach applicable to all and those who differ are all greedy salesworms? One of such well-known figure that I have seen selling seminars is, in my view, not exactly doing the right thing. Products that are of a different nature are promoted as an alternative to preference shares. Superior products that gives a much lower commission is shunned in place of 1 that has impeccable packaging and gives a much higher commission.

Are you getting the whole story?

No related posts.