On Wednesday, January 17, 2001, the Straits Times (ST) released the following report, "Lawyers charged with copying data". Similarly, Project Eyeball (PE) reported this the same day: "Local News Briefs: Ex-Lee & Lee lawyers charged". Likewise, Channel NewsAsia (CNA) had carried this story the day before: "Two ex-Lee & Lee lawyers charged in Subordinate Court".

Commendable Issues

All three reports focused on the facts of the story. This is in line with guidelines given out to media on how crime stories should be reported. ST further identified, "This is the first time lawyers have been charged in court with offences under the Computer Misuse Act." While PE provided the shortest version of the facts facilitating a quick read, CNA was the first to release the story.

Issues of Concern

All three reports identified one of the lawyers charged as the daughter of a leading Senior Counsel, who was named. Clearly, this is something that is most disturbing since it raises some serious questions of privacy.

It is not understood why it was necessary to refer to the lawyer being charged in such a manner. Perhaps, it was due to father's secondary role as employer. In such a case, it could be argued that such identification is permissible.

Nevertheless, having a family member on trial is already a painful experience. This is only made worse when other members of the family are pulled into the situation by media. Surely, this calls for a more understanding media.

What You Could Do

Read the relevant reports and ask yourself if such naming is appropriate. Then, send your feedback to the relevant media concerned:

1. Channel NewsAsia - newseditor@channelnewsasia.com 2. Project Eyeball - talk@eyeball.com.sg 3. The Straits Times - stforum@cyberway.com.sg