When One Word Sparks Uproar How Alleged Cast A Shadow Over Sultan Ibrahim S China Visit

---

I wrote this piece for my column in scoop.my The edited version was published on the morning of 26 Sept 2024. Since then, BusinessToday has rectified their story by removing the reference to Reuters. People familiar with the matter told me that Reuters said they had not written at all about the King discussing HSR in China. The original report, Malaysia King to seek high-speed rail funds on China visit,  came from Bloomberg and the same report was picked up by others including Straits Times (Singapore) and The Edge. Bloomberg said in the report that reps from YTL, one of the companies bidding for HSR, were part of the King’s delegation to China, a claim refuted by YTL.

Kuala Lumpur: The use of one odd word in a typically 25-word intro of a news report can change the whole story, any journalist worth his or her salt will tell you. BusinessToday’s use of “alleged” when quoting a 20 Sept report by Reuters on our King’s visit to China is an example of how that can happen. 
I sent the article to an old colleague who writes for the news portal. 
“Reuters … has alleged? Is this news article sahih? Weird choice of word.”  I did not get a response

This was the day after the report King In China For High-Speed Rail Investment Discussion: Reuters was posted online by BusinessToday. Excerpts:
Reuters in an exclusive editorial has alleged that the King of Malaysia is in China to seek investment for a high speed rail project from a Chinese State Owned Company.
According to the report, the revived Singapore Malaysia HSR project will be activated using private funding as the government has reiterated that taxpayers’ money will not be used. The report stated Sultan Ibrahim Iskandar is looking for investment from a Chinese State-owned company which it said the source did not want to be quoted. 
Earlier, Transport Minister Anthony Loke had said the multi-billion ringgit project did receive many offers with proposals coming from both local and foreign companies, however the decision will finally be made by the cabinet once all the option are studied. 


Till today, as far as I know, Istana Negara has not commented on the “allegation”. Neither has the Transport Ministry, which was also mentioned in the report

They should. They can deny or confirm the report but equally important is to dispute the “allegation”.  For two reasons. Firstly, because “allege” in simple English is used to assert that someone has done something wrong or illegal, typically without proof. Court reporters use that word a lot - alleged rape, allegedly beaten her husband, etc. 
And, secondly, clarifying the matter is necessary in order to uphold the integrity of the Palace and the government. 
The Reuters’ exclusive was picked up by the Edge Singapore, Bloomberg and Singapore Straits Times (Malaysia King to seek funds for high-speed rail on China visit). Every report quoted “people familiar with the matter”, a favourite phrase among the younger journalists. Excerpts:
Sultan Ibrahim’s delegation includes representatives of YTL, the people said. The Malaysian company is one of the three groups shortlisted for the project, The Edge Malaysia reported in March.
YTL executive chairman Francis Yeoh told Bloomberg TV in November it was interested, while stopping short of confirming its participation in the bidding process.
Sultan Ibrahim has been a long-time backer of the rail link, which Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s government revived in 2023 with a caveat that it would not be funded by taxpayers.
When the relevant authorities do not feel that they need to respond immediately to the assertions by a news portal or news wire,  people who are not familiar with the matter will get the wrong ideas. And that was exactly what happened in this case.
Since the “alleging” report, our social media have been inundated with suspicious Malaysian netizens (read people who are not familiar with the matter) spewing their own theories and, yes, allegations!
Look at some of the comments garnered by the Bloomberg report:

All these allegations are grossly unfair to the YDPA Sultan Ibrahim. He was in China on the invitation of President Xi Jinping to “deepen strategic ties” in conjunction with 50 years of China-Malaysia bilateral relations. 
The King was not there to lobby for companies bidding for the HSR nor was he there on a “personal business trip trying to save his investment in Forest City” as “alleged” in the comment section of one of the news portals. 
(Read also Singapore Straits Times’ Malaysia unveils zero tax for family businesses in Forest City, in bid to revive Johor project)
Most social media commenters, like the mainstream media’s oft-quoted people-familiar-with-the-matter, are almost always anonymous. All in the name of freedom of expression, I’m sure.
When it is obvious that a news report or social media posting would bring grief to the institutions, it is the job of the people tasked with upholding the integrity of these institutions to step in quickly and confidently to nip it in the bud. 
Otherwise, things could derail (pun intended) and these institutions and the Madani government will be subject to, er, all sorts of allegations.

Ends

---