The Straits Times, July 13, 1984
By Zainul Abidin Rasheed in Jakarta
COMPETITION alone does not ensure quality newspapers.
Quality people working in a company that is financially sound can produce a quality newspaper.
These were the Minister for Culture, Mr S Dhanabalan's comments last night on the proposed merger between The Times Organisation and the Singapore News and Publications Limited.
Mr Dhanabalan said the boards of directors' statement "brings home again this basic truth".
He said that if you had a newspaper struggling for survival you would not have a good newspaper.
He felt that the move would achieve two of the objectives for merger – avoid duplicated costs and create a major publishing base for improvements.
It would definitely make the two groups' newspapers financially stronger because they would share common facilities.
Mr Dhanabalan, who is also the Foreign Minister, is here to attend the Asean ministerial meeting and the post-ministerial conference with dialogue partners. In an interview, he gave what he called "initial views" on the merger.
The advantages of economy, the financial advantages of putting newspapers together need not wipe out completely the competitive element.
"Of course, it does not make sense to have two morning papers, but in one newspaper company, it is not unknown to have very strong competition between a morning and an afternoon paper or even between a daily and a Sunday paper.
"That competitive element can be retained with a stable comprising a morning English and afternoon English, a morning Chinese and an afternoon Chinese paper."
He said that the newspapers could operate quite independently, without losing the advantages of common services.
"I would not say this does not meet the public's needs. It can. But if, as the directors have stated, the two papers have started competing, with substantial costs being incurred, maybe resulting even in losses, then there is even less likelihood of having a good paper, less likelihood of the public being served."
On the point of competition between the rival groups which some feel have brought about sharper competition and qualitative improvements, he said he would not deny that. "But it is not just competition alone that makes a good paper," he said.
"However idealistic you are, you cannot run away from certain facts.
"Look at the Times of London. Yes, it is a good paper but all the time floundering financially. How long can they go on?
"They were forced to change their strategy, lower their standards, having bingo…not in keeping with what The Times is supposed to be…Financial troubles are bound to affect the quality of a newspaper."
He was asked if he thought the merger would help what the government was trying to achieve in restructuring the press two years ago.
He replied: "The restructuring of the papers had two parts to it. The more important part was getting the two Chinese papers together. That part is not affected by the latest restructuring.
The second part was to get an English newspaper to compete with The Straits Times so that there would be two companies covering both languages.
"That part, I think having worked out the sums now, the two boards have come to the conclusion that it is going to be a very costly exercise and we have no assurance that at the end of it we would in fact end up with good papers."
What advice would he have for many journalists who feel that their future is uncertain and their dreams shattered.
He said: "I don't know how they can say it is dreams shattered. I would say journalists can still work with different papers, whether Chinese morning or afternoon or English morning or afternoon.
"It is surprising how quickly people can develop loyalty towards the particular paper they work for.
"And at the same time there will be assurance of belonging to a large and financially strong group so that you can in fact put out of your mind your financial worries and concentrate even more on raising journalistic standards."
Journalists: One-hour demo in the rain
MORE than 100 journalists stood in drenching rain outside Times House in Kim Seng Road yesterday to protest against the merger.
Wearing black armbands and carrying placards, the journalists from The Straits Times, The Sunday Times, Berita Harian and Business Times chanted "No merger, no merger." On the fence were a few hastily put up banners.
Many other non-editorial staff also came out to support the group during their lunch-time demonstration.
Police and Labour Ministry officials arrived to keep a watch on the gathering which dispersed at 1.30 pm when they returned indoors. They had been outside for an hour.
Most of the journalists said they would sorely miss the spirit of real competition under the new arrangement.
Said one: "It is never really a real fight when members of the same family compete against one another. It is more like a friendly game."
Another added: "The people who planned this merger are probably not journalists. They do not understand what drives the journalists to greater heights. They should not just think of the money part. To compete against others in another camp gives one the flip to perform better."
"Journalism is not a cushy nine-to-five job. It is that desire to be the better performer, the better journalist writing the better story that makes our job exciting. The merger will kill this drive," another journalist said.
The gathering was a spontaneous one. When reporters arrived at Times House in the morning, a small group decided they should do something to express their unhappiness.
It was not long before most agreed a peaceful demonstration was the best way.
A statement issued by the group said: "We feel strongly about the merger. We do not represent everyone. However, we feel that many people in both STP and SNPL, share our concern about the implications of the move."
Today, the journalists will meet at noon to discuss the effects the merger will have on professional journalism in Singapore. A statement will be issued after this.
Copyright © 1998 Singapore Press Holdings. All Rights Reserved.
Previous