"... coverage was not balanced?"

read this commentary

as a young adult, this is the first general election that i watched closely and honestly, the main reason i turned to alternative media like the internet is the skewed reporting of our local media (read: papers & tv). i attended a couple of rallies and i never once saw a HONEST reporting of the events. what i read and watch were predominantly about those people cladded in white.

consider these statistics (figures derived from sing stat)
- those with tertiary education formed 32% of the population here in 2003, up from 23.3% in 1998
- those aged below 40 as at 2003 stands at 41.4% of the population
- 70% of the household here have a computer and 56% has internet access in 2003, up from 47% and 23% respectively in 1998

i've extracted figures relevant to the message that i want to convey and it is this: our young now grows up with computers and the internet as an integral part of their lives. being the knowledge-based economy that the govt wants us to be, more and more people have a tertiary education. if our local media keeps producing skewed reports, who can blame us for turning to alternative media sources? to say that the comments on the internet is not balanced is as good as shooting yourselves in the foot!