So TISG published another article: “STTA taxing junior team’s prize money to sustain its foreign players”. The truth (something TISG is increasingly having problems with) is that the money collected also funds our local athletes. And our PRC mercenary FT gladiators are also “taxed” on their prize money. These “taxes” go into a pool, which is used to fund STTA activities.
That’s locals funding FTs isit, TISG? It’s winners funding others. And like it or not, the gladiators have until recently been doing pretty well in winning awards .
But maybe TISG is alleging that the FT gladiators are not “taxed’?
The piece sounds like another one of its xenophobic (“to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Singapore” isit? Why liddat TISG?) pieces aimed at attracting eyeballs.
Given that the PAP administration loves FTs and frowns on anything resembling seditious actions, it’s surprising that TISG’s lead editor, P Ravi, while rowing with various people recently (mainly from TOC allied people) on journalistic and editorial standards of integrity said (boastingly?) on Facebook: “Government and related agencies see us as a useful loudhailer.”For the context in which he said this, scroll down to almost the bottom until you see his photo, the text is somewhere below: http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2016/08/09/tisg-lashes-out-in-response-to-ncmp-daniel-gohs-remarks-on-its-article/.
Given that Ravi keeps stressing that TISG is not a socio-politcal site but a commercial site, one can only wonder what it’s being paid to act as a loudhailer for the “Government and related agencies”? Commercial sites exist to make money (they hope), not promote causes.
TISD raises money
Funny that Ravi claims that unlike a socio-politcal site, “Commercial sites must produce what readers want and will come back to consume or risk going bankrupt.” because TISG had to call for a new round of funding from existing and new shareholders late last year because it had run out of funds. Obviously TISG wasn’t producing what readers wanted and they were not coming back to consume more from TISG.
Do also read the link above for the comments it made to Daniel Goh about its 1m unique visitors. A reader of this alerted me to the exchange to show the depths to which TISG will sink to. To me it shows the arrogance of TISG: telling Daniel Goh that he should comment on TISG’s wall because TISG has “1m unique visitors”. P Ravi and Kumaran Pillay (TISG’s publisher) like to say that TISG has the eyeballs that others are jealous about, hence the criticism about its journalistic and editorial standards.
On the issue of eyeballs and ad revenue from eyeballs,, I’ve calculated that the amount of revenue generated by TISG from eyeball advertising is “peanuts”.
Soul selling for peanuts
Based on a reported boast that it has 3.5m views a month, it would make about $9,000 in ad revenue a month. Based on some more reliable data that it has about 670,000 views a month, the figure comes to around $1700 (Detailed post coming one of these days and these numbers may be refined slightly).
Note I’m only guesstimating only revenue generated from eyeball ads. I make no comment on revenues from other sources because no data is available.
Maybe there is cash for being a loudhailer for the “Government and related agencies”?
And if there is, why is the PAP administration so cock to fund a commercial site that reasonable people can perceive as trying “to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Singapore”?
I don’t think P Ravi and Kumaran Pillay know the ancient Greek superstition: Nemesis punishes Hubris. But at least one of them, an ordained pastor, will be familiar with “Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.” (Proverbs 16:18)
What’s disappointing about TISG’s defence of itself is that it’s not enough to prove critics wrong: they have to be shown to be malign, jealous, dishonest (“less than honest” is a favourite) or stupid, or any combination of two or more of these attributes. Yup TISG sounds, feels and looks like a PAPpy of the Jason Chua variety.
But to be fair, maybe the people in TISG cannot prove critics wrong except by pointing to their eyeball traffic and by distracting from the real issues by sliming their critics. And the eyeball traffic is only worth $1,700 – $9,000 a month. Enough for “economy rice” meals for those working there.