Although my op-ed has finally been published in the Straits Times review section as a joint submission, I can’t help but feel a little upset that they rejected my original piece but took this one when the only differences are that 1) it is less critical of the state and 2) more conversational.
The ST review editor’s stated reason for rejecting it was ‘insufficient detail on policy implementation’ but this piece isn’t any more detailed on implementation, so the real reason must be that 1) someone higher up didn’t like my emphasis that the policy is anticompetitive/protectionist and undermines the global schoolhouse economic development strategy, or that 2) it was too policy-wonky (i.e. contra stated rejection reason), or most likely, that 3) an undergraduate has no business questioning policy.
Yet I don’t really care about getting credit as long as a means-tested university tuition voucher system gets implemented, even though I am not likely to be a beneficiary.
If you can’t read the article, it is also posted here. Unlike most major newspapers, the Straits Times insists on pay-only access to online articles, which makes no sense to me since it is state-owned and presumably less concerned with quarterly profits than say, expanding market share, when the marginally additional revenue from online subscribers is more than offset by the potential increase in circulation. Even if it was privately owned, the value of greater circulation would still greater – NYT doesn’t take losses on the print edition for nothing.
The far more critical piece I wrote for The Online Citizen can be found indirectly here.
Could you send it to me? I would like to read it