Ok, I was browsing the Straits Times news, and the following article caught my attention: "S'pore, India sign joint army training pact". Knowing a good number of Indian friends at my lab, I thought it would be a nice topic to chat over. However, as I read the article, one thing struck me ... the article just tells us an army training pact just got signed. No details of what the pact is about or what it entails!
Previously, I would just have shrugged it off and said "oh well ...". However, this time I chose to pursue the matter and googled for it (keywords: "Singapore India Army Training Pact"). This article from the Hindustan times showed up: "India, Singapore ink pact for joint army training".
Now this article actually had proper details, as readers should reasonably expect! I quote:
The agreement provides for the temporary basing of a detachment of SAF personnel for a maximum period of eight weeks, up to two times a year. However, small SAF detachments not exceeding eight personnel may be allowed to be stationed with their equipment in India.
“Besides the bilateral agreement, associated protocols on training, administration and logistics, as also on financial arrangements were also signed. The agreement comes into effect from today (Tuesday) and shall remain in force initially for a period of five years,” the spokesman added.
The Hindustan Times article was not much longer than the one in the Straits Times and in my opinion was way more newsworthy than the latter. What in the world is going on with Singapore journalism these days?