On 27 March, former Straits Times journalist Eliza Teoh took to Facebook to clarify that a viral post circulating again about her time covering Singapore politics was based on her experiences from the 1990s—30 years ago.
In her heartfelt post, she explained that her words had been copied without permission, reshared in altered forms, and even weaponised for political mileage.
“Every so often, it goes viral again… Some versions chopped up and taken out of context, and words I didn’t say, tagged on.”
“I wrote about my experiences from a time long past… Today, the media landscape is vastly different.”
Teoh acknowledged that things have changed: there are now citizen journalists, alternative news platforms, and more access to diverse views. But she also noted that the post continues to resonate because public distrust in mainstream media remains.
In that now widely shared post, Teoh described how she and her colleagues were not allowed to report positively on opposition candidates. Instead, they were encouraged to highlight trivial missteps and publish unflattering photos—a deliberate strategy, she said, to shape public perception.
“Photos of them with eyes half closed, mouths open, looking sweaty etc were encouraged.”
She shared how she once managed to get a full-page article published on opposition candidate Dr Wong Wee Nam and his team, only to face intense backlash from editors who had to justify the decision to the “higher ups.”
That experience led her to transfer out of the political desk—a move many of her colleagues eventually made as well.
While Teoh emphasized that her experience is from the 1990s, the sentiment behind her words still echoes today.
Just days after her recent post, on 31 March, The Straits Times ran a broadsheet feature with a smiling photo of PAP MP Yeo Wan Ling, placed alongside stern-looking images of opposition politicians Dr Chee Soon Juan and Prof Paul Tambyah.
It’s not as if there weren’t photos of Dr Chee and Prof Tambyah smiling during their walkabout—there certainly were—but those weren’t the ones chosen.
These editorial choices—subtle yet deliberate—mirror exactly the kind of visual bias Teoh described from decades ago.
And in my view, things don’t really change when you’re given S$900 million in grants over five years.
That kind of funding doesn’t just buy printing presses—it buys influence, soft control, and the ability to dictate narrative without needing to issue explicit instructions.
Teoh ended her latest post by encouraging people not to politicise her story but to use it as inspiration for positive action—support local publishers, donate to animal shelters, and stay healthy through aerial sports.
But the fact that her post keeps going viral speaks for itself.
Until media institutions treat all political players with equal dignity and scrutiny, Teoh’s story will remain more than just a glimpse into the past—it will be a mirror of the present.
The post “That post was from 30 years ago” — but Eliza Teoh’s revelations still hit home today appeared first on The Online Citizen.
