The Sunday Times Apologises Publicly For an Article About Low-Income Family After MSF’s Response

Last month, The Sunday Times published a story about a low-income family of 6 who only had $200 to spend for the next three weeks.

Readers were heartbroken by the family’s dire financial situation, and many wondered why the gahmen wasn’t doing more to help them.

Then the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) responded with a Facebook post, and shit was acquainted with the fan.

The Sunday Times Apologises Publicly For an Article About Low-Income Family After MSF’s Response

See, the Straits Times’ article didn’t provide some important details, and after MSF’s response, ST apologised to its readers for the report.

In the original article, ST interviewed a man called Sam and his family, who claimed that in addition to the $200, they only had a few packs of instant noodles, some cooking oil, a half bag full of rice and a bottle of chilli sauce that’s “almost scrapped clean”.

Hoarders all over the country are feeling guilty as they stare at their hundred packets of instant noodles.

As for the solidarity payout of $1,200 (Sam’s $600 and his wife’s $600 combined), it was used to purchase some much-needed supplies and groceries.

At the time, the family said they were waiting for their next ComCare payment of $1,200 in May which would last them for the next three months.

The closure of schools during the circuit breaker also affected the family in two ways:

• Sam lost what little income he used to earn helping his mother as a school canteen vendor
• They have to spend more money on meals for their kids at home, whereas their meals would have been subsidised under financial assistance in school

Sam said he’s even tried calling the Social Service Offices hotline about his financial aid document but it was not picked up.

At this point, readers were either boiling with rage or sobbing with sadness wondering how the authorities could be so indifferent to Sam’s plight.

But just like Donald Trump often does, ST’s article left out some very important details.

MSF’s response

According to MSF, Sam and his family had been getting a range of assistance from the Government and various community partners.

In their post, MSF listed all the different vouchers, payouts, and subsidies Sam’s family has been receiving, assistance that ST neglected to mention in their article:

• Sam is getting $1,200 in ComCare assistance every month since Mar 2020 and the latest ComCare assistance he received was on 3 Apr 2020.
• MUIS has provided them with Zakat Emergency Assistance of $300 cash and $120 in vouchers.
• Husband and wife receive $1,200 in the Solidarity Fund payout on 14 Apr 2020.
• During CB, the family received help from MOE’s extended school meal subsidies, which gives each primary school student $60 and secondary school student $120, even if they stayed at home. Primary school students are also given an additional $20 via public donations.
• Each of his children who are in primary school receives $60 monthly from The Straits Times School Pocket Money Fund
• The family’s rent, utilities, service and conservancy charges, as well as medical fees, are all covered by ComCare Assist.
• School fees for the family are also paid for by the MOE Financial Assistance Scheme.
• Monthly rations were also provided for the family by community partners like Ang Mo Kio Family Services Centre (FSC) and Food from the Heart

That is a mighty long list.

And it’s not just that.

Follow us on Telegram for more informative & easy-to-read articles, or download the Goody Feed app for articles you can’t find on Facebook!

MSF added that Sam was supposed to receive $2,300 in monthly ComCare assistance from 4 May 2020, for 6 months, because he had lost his job.

And when social services officers got in touch with Sam on 19 Apr, he shared that he did not call the SSO hotline nor did he leave his number on any voicemail.

Can the family really claim to have forgotten about all these payouts and subsidies?

Or did ST omit these details?

Either way, the incomplete report was clearly unacceptable.

ST Apologises

In an article published on Sunday (10 May), ST apologised for giving an “incomplete picture” of the family’s situation in their report.

It said “The report fell short of the journalistic standards we hold ourselves to, for which we apologise.”

Aren’t you glad, dear reader, that Goody Feed has such high journalistic standards that we always live up to?

Reader: You literally clickbait me on a daily basis

Ah yes, but we do it with love.

Reader: That’s still bad

Well, you’re here, aren’t you?

Reader: For some reason, I keep coming back for more.

It’s all part of our charm, dear reader.

To watch instead of read our charm, you might want to subscribe to our YouTube channel whereby we’d update you about what’s happening here daily: