New Man Magazine Singapore SUCKS
I am furious.
Furious. Furious. Furious.
As you may know, I make my living as a freelance journalist, and one of the magazines I write for fairly often is New Man, the Malaysian edition. I was always aware that New Man Singapore, of which the Malaysian edition is a subsidiary, was allowed to reprint any articles in the Malaysian edition, without further payment -- or even notice -- to the contributor. Which was fine. I've worked with publishing companies before with similar, sometimes even less pleasant policies, and as much as it would be nice to be paid twice, I accept that it's just not a reality in this industry. For the record, I don't have any major problems with New Man Malaysia and I do applaud their effort to provide serious features alongside the typical men's magazine fare.
What I did not know is that New Man Singapore is allowed to mangle, rubbish and thoroughly misrepresent a writer's point when reprinting an article.
Moments ago, I picked up the June edition of New Man Singapore, and flipped through it. I was surprised to see that "The Life Aquatic", a long feature on ecological damage and conservationism that I wrote for New Man Malaysia, had been reprinted. The first thing I checked was that they had spelt my name correctly. They had. Then, I scrolled down to the first paragraph...
I did not write the first paragraph.
I would never write such an obnoxious piece of shit.
This is what it says: "Admit it: When you're at a party and some kaftan-wearing cuckoo starts taking the fun out of the evening with alarmist talk of greenhouse gases, melting ice-caps, and ozone depletion, you'd probably be inclined to kick his tree-hugging ass and smash the Styrofoam beer crate just out of spite."
!!! I was so sickened by this that I did not dare turn the page, but not without scrolling through, with rising horror, the rest of the first page. What I read was not editing. It was libel, under my own name!
Looming fear: the Malaysian New Man folks tell me that my feature, "The Body As Battleground", on the commoditization (among other things) of women's bodies by the fashion and advertising industries, which I wrote for their January issue (an excerpt is here), is to be reprinted in Singapore. Can you imagine the butchery that is probably going to happen? I pissed off at least one feminist with my original article. I'm going to have the whole sisterhood turn nasty on me when the Singapore misprint comes out.
Dear Mr Ronald Rajan, Editor: New Man Singapore,
If my article was "poetic rubbish", as you so uncouthly put it under my own byline (I quote, following some words I actually did write, on the first page: "as much as this may sound like poetic rubbish.."), then why reprint it at all? I am disgusted by your lack of ethics -- especially when dealing with an article that is all about ethics -- and disgusted by your gross misrepresentation of me and my points with regards to conservation and the environment.
I have a much better suggestion to you with regards to what you ought to do with that Styrofoam crate if you ever encounter me or anyone like me. However, unlike you, I am just not uncouth enough to spell it out. Use your imagination. You certainly seem to have one.
Yours sincerely,
The kaftan-clad cuckoo
posted by sharanya @ 5:57 PM
32 Comments:
............wow. that's pretty bad.
that's awful!
is there nothing that can be done about it?
get a lawyer and sue them! An apology is not enough.
Take them to court. You'll surely make lots of money there, and it can be easily proved that you did not write that article.
Hi there.
How do you do? Some concerned friends of mine alerted me to your latest blog entry.... Oh my... there's apparently a mismatch in perpspectives here so let me first tell you what i shall do in the hope of pacifying you.
in my next issue, I can explicity state that you, Sharanya M, did NOT write that first paragraph. just so that the world knows that your literary abilities are far more refined and eloquent the doggerel trash that was published under your good name. It was awful wasn;t it? what kind of a monster would do such a thing?
Bear in mind I don’t really have to, since whatever's published in NM Malaysia automatically belongs to our company and we really do have the right to mince, mangle, slice, dice, remix articles or refry them with beans if we so wish. But only for the good of the magazine and its readers and never ever to make fun fo writers. Even so, I'm prepared to do it and i hope you accept this gesture as an olive branch or sorts. And for the record,you are not the kaftan-wearing cuckoo i was referring to (unless of course you are fond of wearing kaftans...)
also i think that there are some things you must understand. it's all well and good to have written a carfeully researched and factually sound story which yours was. but none of it will count for anything if you are unable to connect with your particular audience>> and I KNOW MY AUDIENCE. i liked your article for the points it made and the message it was driving at, but its tone was too clinical and pedantic i'm afraid. NewMan singapore (or malaysia for that matter) are not meant to be geography textbooks. they're meant to be light-hearted reads (albeit ones that carry serious messages now and then)>> there's a fine line between making a serious point in an engaging way, and sermonising.
if you think that i was making fun of you somehow in the article then i apologise. it really wasn't my intention. my ethics dictate that it's my responsibility to ensure the the writers who get published in my magazine will not be labelled boring or lousy. And that's all I was trying to do really. In any case, I don’t think that that our article was encouraging anyone to destroy the world's oceans. The first paragraph was just an intro to get people's attention…cos frankly the way you did it wouldn’t have, regrettably..not in this town anyway
But for the record, i am not a feminist (and i really have no idea why anyone should be. What an awful waste of time, pardon my uncouth tongue). I looked at your "body as a battleground" article. rest assured it will never see the light of day in Satan's soapbox aka (NewMan Singapore) because I am of the opinion that the majority of male magazine readers are not interested in reading about the oppresion of women in a MEN's magazine. :)
Peace be upon you
Ronald Rajan
Managing Editor
NewMan Magazine
to anybody who wants to make an informed comment on the topic, i will suggest you read both versions. i did. and i will say this: a good writer writes for her audience, and not for her ego.
You should sue for misrepresentation and defamation.
Surely you have a press council overseeing publications. File a complaint with them.
In short, engage a lawyer.
Anonymous, Kelvin, Alex -- I don't think so. I can't afford to sue and I think I've made my point. In fact, Ronald Rajan's comment above is even more illustrative of my point.
Koh Yuen -- Sure, I welcome everyone to read both versions. I'm sure that you're an incredible writer (at least, in contrast to me). But your reading tastes must be quite bland, given you took the time to read both versions. And my blog. Hmm.
Oh, and by the way, some "writers" (actually, I prefer the "journalist" term here) write for the money. Familiar with that concept? ;)
Ronald -- Ah. How good of you to stop by my blog. I'm tempted to let your comment speak for itself, which it does a pretty good job of, but since you took such an effort, I'm obliged to respond.
"in my next issue, I can explicity state that you, Sharanya M, did NOT write that first paragraph. just so that the world knows that your literary abilities are far more refined and eloquent the doggerel trash that was published under your good name. It was awful wasn;t it? what kind of a monster would do such a thing?"
No thanks. No such thing necessary. Reserve your snark, and your column inches, for the next person you piss off.
"also i think that there are some things you must understand. it's all well and good to have written a carfeully researched and factually sound story which yours was. but none of it will count for anything if you are unable to connect with your particular audience>> and I KNOW MY AUDIENCE. i liked your article for the points it made and the message it was driving at, but its tone was too clinical and pedantic i'm afraid. NewMan singapore (or malaysia for that matter) are not meant to be geography textbooks. they're meant to be light-hearted reads (albeit ones that carry serious messages now and then)>> there's a fine line between making a serious point in an engaging way, and sermonising."
And I think there is something that you must understand. As if your mishandling of my article doesn't reflect badly enough upon your good self and your magazine, then your words above have certainly seen it home. Are you suggesting that NM Singapore is so lacking in decent articles that you must run ones which you find clinical, pedantic and generally unsuitable for your magazine, with tweaks here and there to deem it more digestible? Why so? Are you not capable of coming up with sparkling stories dumbed down to your sense of perfection on your own? You didn't have to run my article, you know. You chose to. And now you cannot defend that choice without resorting to insulting me? Hmm.
"if you think that i was making fun of you somehow in the article then i apologise. it really wasn't my intention. my ethics dictate that it's my responsibility to ensure the the writers who get published in my magazine will not be labelled boring or lousy. And that's all I was trying to do really. In any case, I don't think that that our article was encouraging anyone to destroy the world's oceans. The first paragraph was just an intro to get people's attention cos frankly the way you did it wouldn't have, regrettably..not in this town anyway"
Hmm. But out of concern for your writers you mangle them to the point where they contradict themselves? Perhaps you think being labelled a hypocrite is far more pleasant than being labelled boring or lousy.
"But for the record, i am not a feminist (and i really have no idea why anyone should be. What an awful waste of time, pardon my uncouth tongue). I looked at your "body as a battleground" article. rest assured it will never see the light of day in Satan's soapbox aka (NewMan Singapore) because I am of the opinion that the majority of male magazine readers are not interested in reading about the oppresion of women in a MEN's magazine. :)"
Really? That's odd. I wonder what all those editors (of, say, NM Malaysia and Plan B, among many many other non-gender-specific magazines) were and are thinking when they specifically commission feminist articles from me for their magazines. Articles in the plural, in case you missed that. Because they were well-received and, if you pardon the immodesty, must have been at least somewhat well-written. You see, I am of the opinion that the majority of magazine readers, male or female, aren't stupid. Looks like we'll just have to agree to disagree on this point.
Congratulations, Mr Rajan -- you've insulted both me and your Malaysian counterpart in the same go. And, possibly, your own readership. Quite a record.
And peace be upon YOU, sir. :)
My goodness! I couldnt believe my eyes as I read this guy Ronald's comment here. Is this his attempt to defend his mangling of the article? What an ass he has made of himself in the process. "Feminism a waste of time"???!!
Sorry I havent yet recovered from the shock of his words.
you mean that writing an article for new man means that you give up all your rights to the writing?
are all magazines like that?
Nicely done!
If the reply from Mr Rajan was truly from Mr Rajan, then you just did a nice job shooting yourself in the foot and grossly embarrassing yourself sir. Perhaps you should get a second opinion before you publish anything on the web again? As an editor, you should know how to keep your personal feelings out of your writing. It will make your stand more convincing and persuasive. In this case, you're failed at it, terribly. Good luck to you.
Well done Sharanya. I hope more people appreciate you for your work.
arrrgggghhh - am shocked beyond measure ... not that a magazine would "improve" your work but that any editor could reveal himself as being so crass and insensitive! "new man" anything isn't a magazine i'd want to write for after this.
My only impression of New Man is its blatant and shameless rip-off of the layout of GQ magazine (US Edition) when it first started.
I'm talking about ripping-off to the point of being identical.
Needless to say, I haven't bothered with any subsequent issues.
hey dear, i am so sad to hear this man...i cant believe that the written media can do such a thing and I hope they wont do it again...take care yeah...
What a lame managing editor!
The reply is totally destroying the image of magazine itself.
I don't understand what the whole hoo-hah is about. I read the article (NewMan Singapore), i liked it. It's not something you read often in a men's magazine, and as someone who cares about the environment as much as the next guy (or woman), I'm impressed that they actually published it (Have you seen the kinds of feature stories they publish in other commercial magazines here?).
And with regards to the "lead paragraph", IT WORKS. It got my attention, and i'm sure it got others who are less inclined to read "pedantic" stuff like that.
it seems like you don't know much about how the publishing industry works. if you thought this was an affront to your sensibilities as a writer, i suggest you try your hand at actually writing full-time for a magazine or a newspaper. copy editors MANGLE stories, change or make new lead paragraphs to make it readable and interesting. editors DO KNOW their target audience.
let me ask you: did you write the article because you truly wanted to inform people about what's happening to our oceans? having a byline and being recognised as a writer is well and good, but you're not writing a column about what you do every sunday afternoons, you're writing a feature story (and a very commendable one at that) that's MORE important than the person who wrote it.
I'm a freelance writer as well. I've gotten my features tweaked, edited--and at times, i dont' even get a byline! but my advice is, get used to it. that's how the industry works. now if you're talking about publishing your own book using this article, then who's to stop you from using your original article?
as long as it makes people read, that's what i say.
George
my name is Simona and I am model from Brasil... I am also so so so angry with newman from singapore and mr ronaldo...i was model in newman malaysia and then singapore also use same picture in magazine and not ask permisione of me, and no pay me extra...just like you miss manis!
then i see in singapore they change many things my photograph... they make me from very skinny to no so skinny, eyebags n cellulite no more, and cannot also see my scars on wrists! i email say this is not Simona! u no ask me, u no pay me extra! u want use my picture u use real me! no change this change that you stupido!....and mr ronaldo also says that not what readers want to see...i say u stupido, if true what you say then do not use my picture. Y u use? you no right make me look more beautiful! that is not same me real live..if true what you say then why i so many magazines now use simona picture? they is dumb. i am proud you miss mani
Hallo,
i got this link from tomorrow.sg and seriously i don't see what the big deal is about. I've freelanced for about 5 years before getting a fulltime writing job in the publishing industry about 4 years ago and what you've described is but normal practice.
In the past 9 years, i have had my submitted articles ripped apart, thrown away or re-written under the editor's scrutiny. But i do find that the finished work usually looks better than it was even if it doesn't resemble what i had handed in. It's the editor's job after all to mould the article to suit the publication and the editing does differ from one mag to another. So while it may pass muster for newman malaysia, it might need to be tweaked for say, newman singapore.
I think you should take a more positive spin on this episode because what i do take away from each (often painful) re-write is how to craft my stories better. All writers/journalists (me included) are egoistical and hate to see our articles "mangled" but that shouldn't stand in the way of improving ourselves in the process.
personally, i think you're still new at this and unfamiliar with the process and if you're keen on pursuing a career in writing, its best to tone down that ego - it won't help your writing, and it sure won't help in getting employed.
Chin up and keep writing!
Everyone -- I'm astonished at how much response this post has gotten. I'm amazed my venting has provoked this much response! I'm sorry if I don't reply specifically to your comment. I think you all know pretty much where I stand on this.
George -- Please see my response to Ken below with regards to how little I know about writing and publishing.
Ken -- Thanks very much for your concern. But I've been writing for 15 years, and getting published since before I even hit my teens. And I am not pursuing a career in writing. I have a career in writing. All the best in your pursuit.
Simona -- Thanks. If you did have that experience with New Man, then I'm sorry you went through it. I'm not a model, so I can't really comment. But I do sympathise with your outrage.
I've been in journalism for a short period of time, definitely not as long as Sharanya, Kevin, George or whoever else (NewMan possibly).
As a writer, I've gotten my articles chopped up before too, more times than I care to remember. And sure, after the re-writes they came out better and fit well into the overall structure and style of whatever publication.
But at some point you've got to stop thinking about what fits into the publication and what your story actually is. If it takes such butchery to be made presentable, it's obviously being made into something completely different. And why would you accept that, as a writer?
I think NM SG should have at least had the decency to say something before it went to print, so you could've decided on how your article was to be represented. And Ronald's comment made this entire situation unsalvageable.
Good stuff. Would like to connect to you.
do you gtalk? My is is: amalasingh
To the anonymous coward (cowards, maybe, but the modus operandi indicates a lone ranger) who's been taking the time and effort to smear me on my own blog, please remember that there is a reason comment moderation was invented.
I allowed through a ridiculous amount of comments, because I don't think moderation is an excuse to censor conflicting points or criticism, but I can't be bothered anymore. Especially since a couple of patterns, including responding to comments which had not been moderated through yet, have been noticeable. Thanks for the effort. Strange how much you think you know about me or about why I was angry, since some of your assumptions clearly indicate that you did not actually even read my post, but reacted to what you saw in the earlier comments, or what someone else told you (by the way, there are actually a couple things I was told by the local staff about the so-called "editing" process that went into this article down south that I chose not to reveal on this blog, because I think certain points were articulated clearly enough by both parties, intentionally or not, without dragging those things in).
Anyone who has a problem with me expressing my views or with my gargantuan, immature ego should stay off my blog, no? The more you think about me the bigger a monster I become, you know. ;)
Ewwww... I can't believe this. Do these people really think, after reading your entire article (or so they say) that one paragraph made such a huge difference? They must have kept reading because they liked the rest of it. Ya... I think it's a smear campaign. So contradictory.
Going by what you say, the first paragraph completely goes against the whole article. Please lah...
Actually, come to think of it, this whole incident reminds me of something a former employer of mine, who also did freelance journalism on the side, experienced. Said employer wrote a piece for a magazine in which she extolled the virtues of her nation, etc. The piece ended with something along the lines of "P.S.
This article was brought to you courtesy of the Sedition Act". The article was printed verbatim, with the exception of that single line. Clearly a case of editing that distorts the writer's point, perspective and intention. Not unlike my experience here.
New Man Malaysia has asked me to clarify that they have not worked with a Brazilian model named Simona.
Amalasingh -- I am contactable via email, but not Gtalk.
Ken: What is 'normal practice' does not equate to the CORRECT practice. Your acquiescence in such practice would only further such acts as 'normal'. You may like to be reminded that editors are not always right, and many do not practice responsible journalism.
Koh Yuen/Anonynmous: a good writer writes for his/her audience, and the article succeeds if the audience like what they read.
BUT it is MISREPRESENTATION to edit the CONTENT/STYLE of an article IN ANY WAY without due consultation and agreement with the original writer. It is partly true that articles written belong to the property of the publishing firm, but to reprint an article heavily edited to convey a different message AND INCLUDING the name of the ORIGINAL AUTHOR is misrepresentation (and it isn't rocket science why that is so).
Articles may only be edited for BREVITY (which in this case is unlikely given the nature of the publication), and an article edited that conveys a different message across to its audience (its not what the audience likes to read but what is interpreted from the article) is a potential battleground for defamation (and libel is actionable per se).
If you can't afford a law suit to vindicate your rights, I suggest you write to the publisher of New Man and/or press association of Singapore and file a complaint. The publisher is just as liable as New Man for defamation.
Ronald Rajan lacks responsible journalism (as can be seen from his condescending article), and his reply to you is a sword at his throat (both in law and at his job).
Wot a blithe response from the managing editor from Singapore! What is he, 18? Was that condescending repartee supposed to be mistaken for cleverness, or - worse - wit?
I'm sorry for you, Sharanya. As a freelancer I suppose you don't have that many choices. But as a long-time buyer of New Man, I do. I'm not buying anymore issues.
Thanks for showing them up for the kind of immature turd that you'd expect from certain other men's titles. I guess some editors can float better than others.
- Ruhayat X
Sue them. There's really no question about money. Many lawyers will do pro bono work if they think the cause is just. No harm in trying. If you keep silent he will get away with much more. It's like someone raping your children, I know you want to keep quiet and hope it blows away, but what's going to stop him from raping more children if you do ?
>And I am not pursuing a career in >writing. I *have* a career in >writing.
Sharanya, you are my hero!
i would say that those kind of actions (mangling an article without first consulting the author, and anything tantamount to that) kills the creative process. and if any journalist says that it's an experience to help you grow, i would say that it IS an experience, but there's no way that the experience will help you grow. in fact, if as a journalist you just swallow your pride and accept that your articles being edited without prior consultation, you'll find yourself being treated the same way by other editors (taking cue from dr. wayne dyer here). bravo sharanya for standing her ground and live up to her pride as a journalist.
I must salute you for standing your ground. It's very indecent of the editor to come to your personal blog and leave those patronizing comments, no matter how well he might view his own intentions. Hopefully,
what goes around, comes around.
I am disgusted! okay this was about 2 months ago but i am still disgusted.
Miss Mani since i did not read either of the articles i believe i should not comment on whether the editing was apt. But i do believe that a certain amount of editing should be allowed to make a piece maybe more light hearted, etc. However, seeing how furious you are i expect the editing was much more warped than that.
But that Rajan! If his boss sees this he might just get sacked so perhaps a good idea would be to contact his boss and get him fired since he is obviously unfit for his job, which can be obviously seen from his lack of tact, ethics and manners.
I admire you for standing your ground and your "And I am not pursuing a career in writing. I have a career in writing" is fantastic!(:
Ningjia
Post a Comment
<< Home