littleworkpage

When I blogged on Tuesday about MDA's decision to bring ten news sites under licensing conditions, there was no subsidiary legislation yet on the matter.  http://article14.blogspot.sg/2013/05/from-licensing-to-regulation-of-content.html On 29 May 2013, the MDA has gone ahead to issue a subsidiary legislation:  The Broadcasting (Class Licence) (Amendment) Notification 2013.  This Notification amends the earlier Broadcasting (Class Licence) Notification.  The amendment that has been made will cause Paragraph 3 to appear as follows: "3. The provision of the following licensable broadcasting services are subject to a class licence except a computer on-line service provided on or after such date as the Authority specifies in a notice given to the provider of the service under paragraph 3A : (a) audiotext services; (b) videotext services; (c) teletext services; (d) broadcast data services; (e) VAN computer on-line services; and (f) computer on-line services that are pro...

It has started.  After much discussion about a Code of Conduct for online content providers, bloggers, news sites, etc. (and after much resistance to that idea from the online community), the government has decided to institute a modest measure in controlling/regulating/muzzling the online community.  The salvo has come from the Media Development Authority.  The MDA has, today, made the following announcement: "From 1 June 2013, online news sites that report regularly on issues relating to Singapore and have significant reach among readers here will require an individual licence from the Media Development Authority (MDA). This will place them on a more consistent regulatory framework with traditional news platforms which are already individually licensed." I did a quick check on the Government Gazette.  There is no Gazette notification as yet on this.  Under S.8 of the Broadcasting Act (cap 28), the MDA has the Authority to grant licences for broadcasting. ...

People who are involved in article marketing can read this and discover there is a great resource available right here to help them submit to article sites and reap the benefits of the additional exposure. Of course, there are right ways and wrong ways to do anything and this post looks at these and how you can benefit from article submission sites even in these days of strict SEO limitations placed on all link building strategies by Google. The first thing you need to understand is that you can't go blasting out tons of spun articles full of links to you money sites any more. You will ultimately end up doing more harm to your site as a result because it will get caught up in the algo for getting too many low quality links and be penalized in the serps. Obviously this is something you want to avoid at all costs. There is a smarter way to work and make the best use of article directories and submission sites and you can take one or both of two options. 1. Write quality content and s...

I've been awfully busy and have taken some time off blogging.  But, some pretty interesting things have been going on that warrant some commentary:  the questioning of a local cartoonist by the police, the judgment in one of the two s.377A cases and the General Elections in Malaysia, just to name a few.  But, I figured that I'd get back to blogging by dealing with the 'gang-rape' analogy in relation to democracy that has raisede quite a storm.  PAP MP Nordin posted on his Facebook page a quotation from Terry Goodkind that kind of riled up the online community.  This kind of took me by surprise.  The more I read the quote, the more puzzled I became.  Why such an adverse reaction? I first came across this issue when I saw a Facebook posting by "Rice Bowl" (Kenneth Jeyaretnam's alter ego): "PAP Member of Parliament for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC Zainudin Nordin appears to be using his Facebook page to promote the view that democracy is akin to gang rape. ...

Mr. Richard Pryor. One of the greatest comedians of all time. I thought about pacing myself here, perhaps even being stingy with the new material, because you know that one day it’ll dry up again, and then we’ll be on hiatus for another thousand years. But, if I have something nice I can’t wait to share it, even if it crumbles slightly in the sharing. So having said all that, here, have a slice of crumbly, sticky, Word pie... Prior and previous are an interesting pair of words that suffer from similar problems   as start and begin , and end and finish . They are largely synonymous, but prior also has an extra definition, and sometimes this creates discord in the rhythm of a sentence. Let’s look at those definitions: 1. Previous (adj) Existing or coming before in time or order. 2. Prior (adj) Existing or coming before in time, order or importance . The classic example of prior ’s extra definition is, ‘I’m sorry Piotr, I can’t meet you on Tuesday as I have a prior engagement .’...

 I would say 'Sorry I was away so long', but I suspect the silence was golden ;) This is something I was asked about recently by one of my new colleagues. (By “new colleagues” I mean ‘one of my colleagues in the translating office that I work in at my new job (yes, I am once again gainfully employed and free of the glass-walled tyranny of freelancing from home – hence the new material. ;)). Let’s begin, as we traditionally do, with the OED definitions: begin (v) 1) perform or undergo the first part of an activity; 2) come into being, or have its starting point at a certain time or place Jakub had just begun a life sentence for murder. It was beginning to snow. The cycle path begins at the base of Kopiec Kościuszki. Our story begins in France, in 1412. The event began quietly, with minimal fuss or bother. The road to understanding begins with one small email. We began unpacking the sniper rifle after the proofreader had left the building. start (v) 1) cause to happen or begi...

like don't like understand my good stuff my bad stuff don't understand Bach ? "I don't get it" is a reaction I have when reading some works. I may still like them, so I could fill in the first column of the table on the right. I think there are pieces that I understand and (hence) don't like, but is it fair to dislike a piece that you don't understand? Would one dislike a piece merely because it's in a language you don't understand? And yet, in other situations "I don't like" versus "I don't understand" seems too artificial a distinction, a politically-correct attempt to blame oneself rather than the writer - is disliking always the result of failed (inappropriate) understanding? I doubt it. Amongst the options when facing something you don't get are Trying to understand it Accepting that you won't be able to understand it - a blindspot Believing that the work is bad because you don't understand it, thou...