Esther Ng said such letters were usually produced verbatim and would skip verification processes, such as fact-checks, typically accorded to regular news articles.
She said this in a defamation suit brought by DAP’s Lim Guan Eng over MCA vice-president Tan Teik Cheng’s letter to the editor published in The Star last March.
The letter written by Tan demanded that Lim explain himself over a claim that RM4 million from the federal treasury given to a Chinese school came with a condition that its name should include that of the developer who donated a substantial sum for its construction.
Lim, who was the finance minister when the application was approved, denied the claim and sued Tan and The Star for defamation.
Ng, who heads The Star’s editorial board as its chief content officer, told the court that the newspaper endeavoured to publish all letters unless they were found to be offensive.
She said in the case of Tan’s letter, the issue was widely reported in Chinese-language newspapers at the height of the Johor state elections in March 2022.
It was MCA man’s story
Ng said Lim could rebut Tan via a letter to the editor, which the newspaper would consider publishing in the same section.
“We published Tan’s opinion, it was his side of the story. It was a hot issue and an ongoing one during the Johor state elections,” Ng told Justice Quah Chew Soon.
“In this case, it is a letter, so it is the author’s stand and is of public interest. If a letter is offensive, we will not publish it. If you read the letter as a whole, it is his (Tan’s) opinion. It is an important issue.”
Lim’s lawyer K Simon Murali asked Ng during cross-examination if Tan had specifically sent a letter to the editor or a press statement.
Ng said the editors received an email from MCA’s publicity bureau and it included the words “press statement”.
She said given that Tan’s statement had come in late in the day, it was relegated to the letters section due to “constraints and manpower issues”.
Simon then asked Ng about the editors’ responsibility in ensuring the truthfulness of the assertions in the letter by first calling up the author to verify the basis of his claims.
Ng said that since it was a letter, there was no need for such checks, even if it was doubtful.
Simon: I put it to you that the name change for the allocation claim in the letter is quite serious, making Lim look like he has abused his power as finance minister.
Ng: It is a serious allegation but not offensive.
Simon: You should have realised that Tan has an axe to grind against my client (Lim).
Ng: Tan was referencing the finance minister and incidentally, the DAP chief. For me, he was talking about the (finance) ministry.
Simon: This puts Lim in a negative light, that he dictated conditions on Chinese schools receiving funds and thus casting aspersions on his character.
Ng: Yes. But he was a minister.
Simon: You must get both sides of the story and be neutral. As an experienced journalist, it should have triggered in you the need to take safeguards, as the letter was offensive to my client.
Ng disagreed, reiterating that since it was a letter to the editor, it didn’t need to be checked.
Later, The Star’s technology general manager Seng Sheng Yeow told the court that Tan’s article had 3,897 page views between March 7, 2022, and Nov 21, 2022, with 3,460 unique page views.
The trial then drew to a close with Quah setting April 12 for submissions and June 21 for decision.
Lawyer Abdullah Abdul Rahman appeared for The Star while Kok Yuen Lin also appeared for Lim. MCA’s Tan Teik Cheng was represented by Sit Jie Hao, Tham Joe Ping and Koay Li Xian.