Change or no change

In News Reports on November 15, 2012 at 11:57 pm

I found ST’s page 1 story on casinos a bit baffling. I always thought that newspapers report changes, but here is a headline which says that Govt’s approach to regulating casinos HASN’T changed: Iswaran.

It’s fine by me if the talk was that the approach is being changed or there is fear and anticipation that it will be changed. Although to be replaced by what, I can’t tell.

Anyway, the story was about changes to the Casino Control laws which have been much talked about, particularly on limiting the “financially vulnerable’’ people’s access to casinos. If there is a change in approach at all, it is that the G is hoping to further minimise social ills – which the MPs roundly applauded with some even wanting more done. I suppose this should count as a “tightening’’ of approach – not a change?

In any case, there I was trying to figure out if I am right about the “real’’ changes (go count the number of times change/changes was used in the article) and I was getting stymied by G reiterating its approach… Only later did I get the news that some committee is being set up, in addition to the curbs on the “financial vulnerable’’. In contrast, I thought Today did a better job of giving the news quick although it did ramble in the end trying to take in MPs’ comments.

On the other hand, I couldn’t find any reference to Teo Chee Hean’s admission that infrastructural development didn’t keep pace with population growth in ST. Maybe I went blind trying to wade through the parliamentary reports. If so, I stand corrected. But it was highlighted in BT and angled that way. It was in Today too, but under the headline that the Population paper will be ready in January. I don’t think that’s a new point – and maybe it’s just a way of capturing what the DPM said.

%d bloggers like this: