THE book, 1959-2009 Chronicle Of Singapore, Fifty Years Of Headline News, carries a report published in The Straits Times on Nov 22, 1965 ('Chin Siong: Hurt in free-for-all'). This story, which claimed that my late brother Lim Chin Siong had been involved in a fight in prison, was established to be false back in 1966 itself.
My brother had sued the paper for libel and the lawyer for Straits Times Press (Malaya) had acknowledged that 'there is in fact no truth' in the allegations made against my brother in the report (''Free for all' libel action by Chin Siong is settled'; May27, 1966).
The paper had also printed a correction and apology, and 'paid into court a sum of money in satisfaction of the plaintiff's claim in this action without admission of liability'.
The book is a collaborative effort by Editions Didier Millet and the National Library Board. It is difficult to understand how a story that had been acknowledged to be false escaped detection despite all the corrective proof-reading such a major collaborative effort involving a national institution would have entailed.
As a key custodian of published national history, the National Library Board owes members of the public a duty not to let falsehoods be perpetuated as part of history.
Lim Chin Joo
Books written without proper verifications.
MR LIM Chin Joo's letter ('Chin Siong story in book was admitted to be false in 1966'; Dec 31) incorrectly suggests that the National Library Board (NLB) failed in its duty to the public by allowing falsehoods to be perpetuated.
Mr Lim's suggestion is based on the mistaken belief that the book, Chronicle Of Singapore: Fifty Years Of Headline News (1959-2009), was co-published by the NLB. It was not. The book was published solely by Editions Didier Millet.
EDM had earlier published similar books in Thailand and Malaysia and came up with the idea of having one for Singapore. To enable us to obtain material for the book, we requested NLB permission to access its library materials. The NLB kindly agreed.
Once access was granted, we researched and selected stories for inclusion in the book, including the item which Mr Lim had raised. After the selection, we completely rewrote the materials. We were also wholly responsible for the conceptualisation, design and production work of the book.
In the circumstances, the NLB did not co-publish, much less perpetuate any alleged falsehood.
Far from failing to discharge its duties, in granting us access, the NLB was in fact complying with its duty under the National Library Board Act to provide a repository for library materials, including newspapers, to facilitate access to such materials.
In the book, we acknowledge the NLB as co-publisher, not to suggest that it had any role in publishing the book, but to thank it for its assistance in granting us access to the materials.
Charles Orwin
General Manager
Editions Didier Millet
PUBLISHER Editions Didier Millet took sole responsibility in general manager Charles Orwin's reply ('NLB didn't perpetuate any falsehood, says publisher'; Monday) to my letter about an error in a book his firm 'co-published' with the National Library Board ('Chin Siong story in book was admitted to be false in 1966'; Dec 31).
But Editions Didier Millet's (EDM) reply about the book, Chronicle of Singapore: Fifty Years Of Headline News (1959-2009), raises further questions such as:
As my letter stated, the book carries a news item which was established to be false in 1966.
I have urged, as a matter of public interest, that falsehoods should not be perpetuated as part of our history.
These were the pertinent matters raised that should have been swiftly and appropriately addressed.
Lim Chin Joo
'Does he stand by the book?'
MR CHENG SHOONG TAT: 'In his eager defence of the National Library Board ('NLB didn't perpetuate any falsehood, says publisher'; Monday), Mr Charles Orwin of Editions Didier Millet appears to have forgotten to acknowledge on record that the book in question, Chronicle Of Singapore: Fifty Years Of Headline News (1959-2009), does perpetuate the falsehood Mr Lim Chin Joo complained about ('Chin Siong story in book was admitted to be false in 1966'; Dec 31), and to apologise for it. Does he stand by the book?'
anyone care to explain about "Lim Chin Joo" incident?
Quoting:
from the above
'paid into court a sum of money in satisfaction of the plaintiff's claim in this action without admission of liability'.
Please describe "without admission of liability"