Negotiating OB Markers When Running the Straits Times

Cheong Yip Seng
To run the newsroom effectively, you need talent. Talented people will not stay in the profession if they can only express one opinion. That's an establishment opinion. They will not accept that. So, to retain talent, I have to give them space. And fortunately, the government, at least LKY recognises that. If the Straits Times has no credibility, it is useless to him.

[Music playing] 

Jimmy
You’re listening to BiblioAsia+, a podcast produced by the National Library of Singapore. At BiblioAsia, we tell stories about Singapore’s past. Some familiar, others forgotten, all fascinating.

For close to two decades, Cheong Yip Seng has had the most important job in Singapore's media industry: the editor-in-chief of the Straits Times. He held this post from 1987 to 2006, back when the Straits Times was still a colossus, a giant standing astride Singapore's media landscape. Back in those days, the Straits Times was the main source of English news in Singapore. And as a result, it shaped perceptions and set the agenda in Singapore in a way that it probably doesn't do so much anymore, given the current media landscape. A few years after leaving the Straits Times, Cheong wrote his memoirs OB Markers: My Straits Times Story. Now in 2025, he has written a sequel titled Ink and Influence. Here to talk about his latest book is Cheong himself. Welcome to the BiblioAsia+ podcast, Cheong. It's very good to have you on the show.

Cheong
Thank you, Jimmy. It's a pleasure to be here.

Jimmy
Let's dive right in. You know, your first book, OB Markers, which was published in 2013. Why do we need a sequel? What exciting things happened between 2013 and now?

Cheong
Well, what happened was that there was one morning when my neighbours and I were having breakfast at Ghim Moh market, and one of them, one of my neighbours, lamented that he found it very difficult to get hold of my first book. Then I explained to them that, you know SPH [Singapore Press Holdings] decided not to continue printing that book. In fact, I wanted at that time to ask the Straits Times, who jointly own the copyright to the book, to let me revise the first book, because there are parts of it which needed to be sorted out to tighten the narrative. And I also had some additional material. So I wanted to contribute additional chapters so that a revised edition of the book could be published, but the publisher was not interested. So the person who raised this point with me at breakfast was the guy who used to work for Simon & Schuster, and he knew somebody from Simon & Schuster who is now with World Scientific Publishing. And he knew that there was material that I could use for subsequent books, and that was what started the ball rolling. 

Jimmy
Okay, why should someone read this book Ink and Influence? You know, what additional material is that? And in what way is it different from your first book?

Cheong
My first book is actually intended primarily for journalists, so that they know the industry that they're going into, the challenges that they will face, the opportunities that are available to them. And I wanted the book to also encourage young, talented people to join the industry, because I know that journalism is a very important part of society. So the book was intended for that purpose.

Since then, I know that a controversy erupted following my publisher publishing a book, and I knew that there was some interest in this whole subject. And after the first book was published, and after the conversation at breakfast, I knew that this additional ground that I had intended to add to the first book, which I could expand into a sequel.

Jimmy
Okay. Maybe you can tell us a little bit about it.

Cheong
The additional ground that I had was to give more coverage to key moments in our history, which I felt is important for Singaporeans to know. For example, that major speech that Lee Kuan Yew made in the Malaysian Parliament when the PAP [People’s Action Party] was in opposition in Malaysia. That was a pivotal moment, and I’ve got additional material about that speech. Talking to my chairman at that time, Lim Kim San, he was my chairman for nearly the entire stretch of my tenure. And I was very fortunate that he gave me a lot of time not to talk about work, but to go back into Singapore's history. So he gave me a lot of material, which I felt, you know, is valuable to share, because the Singapore story is a wonderful story.

But not many Singaporeans take the trouble to go into it. And I thought that it would be a pity if people like me at my age, having gone through so much, do not share these stories. And I feel that the stories would be of some help to younger Singaporeans to understand how the country came about. What are the milestones in our story over 60 years?

And I also decided that some of my journalistic experiences, for example, during my travels going to China, going to work in Hong Kong, and some of the things that our journalists did for society. After they've left the profession, going into the arts, for example, SingLit.

Jimmy
Maybe you can tell us a bit about, you know, how the decision led to you becoming editor-in-chief?

Cheong
In 1987, the official visit to Singapore by the Israeli president, Chaim Herzl, led to an enormous explosion in Malaysia. They protested, Indonesia protested and wanted Singapore to scrap that visit. Because you know that those two countries have no relations with Israel, and they saw the visit as an affront to them.

Singapore, of course, would not bow to that request. And there were demonstrations in Malaysia. They were incensed. In fact, to the extent of some people, some of them, these demonstrators lying on the railway track on the Causeway.

Jimmy
Oh my goodness.

Cheong
Yeah. And I think there were protests at the embassy, High Commission in KL, and in Jakarta. Unfortunately, Lee Kuan Yew looked at the coverage that the Straits Times provided and felt that we had underplayed or tried to tone down the outrage that was felt by the Malays, and his thinking was that the Straits Times should not shield our people.

We should not shield Singaporeans from what is really happening in Malaysia. So unfortunately for us, we had relied on the New Straits Times for our Malaysia coverage to a very large extent because we do have an exchange arrangement with the New Straits Times. The paper that really captured the raw feelings of the Malays was Utusan Melayu which we did not, unfortunately, monitor.

So he was outraged that we had missed a fantastic opportunity to educate the Singaporeans, that this is the nature of the neighbourhood that we were living in, and for him, that episode led him to think that has reached a point of no return for the Straits Times, and that was what forced his hand and he insisted on a change of editorial leadership. That was a trigger. Although before that, you know, we have got run-ins with him every so often. But it did not lead to a change in the editorial leadership. That was, for him, the last straw.

Jimmy
You were Peter Lim's…

Cheong
I was then Peter's deputy.

Jimmy
That's right. How did you feel when you heard word that you were going to take over Peter in this very tense moment?

Cheong
Well, I had mixed feelings. I knew the ins and outs of our negotiations with him with Lee Kuan Yew on how we can stabilise the relationship. There were many attempts over many months, but nothing came out of it. So I wasn’t totally surprised by the change. But on the other hand, I was personally quite happy to continue as Peter’s deputy. I thought we made a good team and there was no need for change. But since change was forced on us, I just had to accept that the Straits Times is an important Singapore institution. I think I have a contribution to make to the paper, and I thought that this would be an opportunity to do so.

Jimmy
The Straits Times obviously is, I mean, was a very, very important part of Singapore possibly, possibly not. Not so much now. But let's talk about that point, you know, it was so important that the editor-in-chief would regularly meet with people like LKY and all that, and they would comment on your coverage and they would make suggestions on coverage.

I was a reporter in the Straits Times for three very short years in the 90s. And I was, of course, a very low-level employee. I guess I came from a position where, you know, we felt that the press needed more independence, the whole fourth estate thing.

But I think you believe that's not really possible in Singapore.

Cheong
You see, this is the thinking of LKY at that time. He says that if he is to effectively govern Singapore, he needs control over three things. First, the Treasury, next the Army, and three, the media. Oh, he needs control over these three institutions to effectively govern Singapore. So that tells you his fundamental position, which means that he does not accept that the press is the fourth estate on the grounds that, look, where’s your mandate? The PAP has to go to the public every four or five years to renew his mandate to govern. Who gives you the mandate to decide how Singapore should be governed? So that was his fundamental position and intellectually, it’s a sound position to take. You may disagree with it, but he has the mandate.

Jimmy
He certainly has that mandate. The Straits Times was also criticised as being a mouthpiece for the government. But it is quite clear that there's also a lot of pushback, so that the editors were not merely scribes taking notes from the political leaders on what to do.

Cheong
When I was in charge, I had a framework on how we should run the newsroom. These are the following things I take into account. Number one, we do have an efficient, incorruptible government, and that is a government that is endorsed time and again at election by a large number of voters. In fact, the PAP has always kept its two-thirds majority, at least two-thirds majority.

So it has popular support as well. So I take a pro-establishment stance because that is how the majority of my readers feel about the government. But having said that, I also know that there's a segment of my readership who wants alternative voices and you know that the electorate is changing. It wasn't like the earlier generations of Singaporeans who will, no matter what happens, put the vote in to re-elect the PAP.

You now have a new electorate emerging who want alternative voices. And the last election is very clear. The opposition was elected partly on the grounds that the public wants an alternative voice. I've got to recognise that need of our readers and I've got to provide a forum in the paper to accommodate that desire. So I made sure that there is sufficient space in the paper for these voices to be heard, for a diversity of opinion.

And the other consideration I had was, to run the newsroom effectively, you need talent. Talented people will not stay in the profession if they can only express one opinion. That's an establishment opinion. They will not accept that. So to retain talent, I have to give them space. And fortunately, the government, at least LKY recognises that. If the Straits Times has no credibility, it is useless to him.

So while the government has got extensive powers over the media and I know why, knowing the history of Singapore, I know why they want this expansive power. I also know that without credibility, it means nothing. So the newsroom has got cards to play. The government needs credibility. We need to keep talent. So that gives me the space to negotiate the OB markers.

Jimmy
As I mentioned in my introduction, the Straits Times had a monopoly in effect of the English news in Singapore, you no longer have that monopoly thanks to technology and all that probably no longer has quite that status. The circulation of the paper has dropped quite a lot.

But in your opinion, what are the main causes of this?

Cheong
Now, Jimmy, I have left the newsroom for nearly 20 years, so I'm no longer in the loop. I do not know what the conditions editors today operate under. So I'm speaking as somebody who is not in the loop, who is looking at the paper and giving it his opinion. You have to remember that context, what I see is that the newsroom is lacking a bunch of experienced editors, experienced editors who could give closer guidance to the younger reporters. Now, I must tell you that I can see in the paper today, the names of journalists who, in my opinion, are gems but they need hand-holding, they need polishing, they need guidance. Now, I was very fortunate in my time because during my time, the Straits Times were making a heck lot of money and the resources that I had enabled me to employ talented people in the newsroom.

My sense is that they are less well-endowed today because advertising revenues are not what they were before, in fact, is very clearly demonstrated by the fact that the government has to provide funding for the Straits Times. So they have got a budget issue. So definitely a manpower issue in terms of experience, editors who could provide guidance, who could help sharpen the newsroom.

I noticed that this is obviously having an impact on the paper.

Jimmy
Right. But surely also I think because of its monopoly, it was very important. Everybody had to read the Straits Times in order to know what was going on. And so it became the platform, right? I mean, Rajaratnam, after he left cabinet, wanted to write letters to the paper. Goh Heng Swee as well, right? Wrote pieces for the paper, which he was paid handsomely for. It was the paper that was the platform. People who wanted their opinions read had to be in it. I don't get a sense that's the case anymore.

Cheong
I think what has dramatically changed is the media industry. They were demolished or they were crushed by the advent of social media. Advertising was sucked up by the social media outlets and advertising revenues declined. And that is a very major change in the industry. So the Straits Times’s importance was badly affected, as you pointed out, Jimmy, quite rightly. The influence that the Straits Times enjoyed before the advent of social media was enormous.

Cheong
In fact, I know that at its peak, the Straits Times was selling more than 400,000 copies a day. I don't think it is managing that number today. In fact, they are putting more resources online, which is the right thing to do. So the landscape has changed. The Straits Times is no longer in the position that it enjoyed, and it has to adjust to the new reality.

Jimmy
Yeah. I want to go back to your book because actually your book has lots of interesting anecdotes. You almost got arrested. Tell us about it. And it wasn't for jaywalking or anything.

Cheong
No, no, we had a wonderful reporter. Young reporter. You may remember him. His name is Ronnie Wai, and he has the ability to bring in exclusive stories. In fact, that was one of his strengths. And I had full confidence that this is a guy whose sources are impeccable. So one day he came in with the story which said that Lee Hsien Loong was leaving the army for a new career.

The story was put on the front page. It ignited a small explosion in MINDEF. They were concerned as to who was the one who leaked the story to Ronnie. So I was summoned to the Ministry of Defence and I met Richard Magnus, who was a senior counsel in MINDEF, and he demanded that I reveal the source of Ronnie's story. I could not do that. I did indicate to Richard, who subsequently became a good friend, indicated Richard, that is not something I can do, because if I did that I would have destroyed the newsroom. Nobody would subsequently talk to us.

I can't do that. So I was prepared to plead guilty if they prosecute me, because Richard did indicate that he could prosecute me. And if I'm prosecuted, there's a risk of a conviction and a jail term.

I had to be prepared to protect the integrity of a newsroom, to be sentenced. I had no defence for publishing that because I know that you'll be in breach. But I also knew that the ministry was anxious to know who leaked the story. Legitimate demand. But I could not meet that demand. Fortunately, as I subsequently found out, you know, they decided to give me a sharp knock on the knuckles and let me off. So there was a brush.

Jimmy
That was one of the most exciting times. I mean, give us an idea of, you know, some of the hardest decisions you've had to make as the editor-in-chief.

Cheong
Actually, I cannot immediately think of a very hard decision that I had to make.

Jimmy
Or maybe something that in hindsight, you wish you had done differently.

Cheong
Well, that would have to do with the loss of some of our best people.

I felt that if I paid more attention to those people and assured them that they have a future in the company, I would not lose them. But I soon found that it was almost impossible to stop people from leaving for new careers. That was impossible to do. Fortunately, I was able to retain quite a lot of the talent that we had. So staff management or staff is a major problem that I had to deal with.

Jimmy
I think you alluded to that. Right. The importance of having talent.

Cheong
Yeah.

Jimmy
And getting talent to work for you.

Cheong
Yeah.

Jimmy
In Ink and Influence and as well as in OB Markers, you talk about LKY’s own assessments of different writers and editors. Did you agree with them or did you disagree?

Cheong
On those issues, I can only agree to disagree. His view that certain writers whose writing were not helpful to the government, I recognise that because I know that they've got a view of their own. They belong to a younger generation of reporters with bright minds. They don't have a worldview similar to the PAP’s.

And I felt that it would be wrong to shut their voices down, because that means I'll be driving them out of the newsroom. So I have to accept that this is an unavoidable burden I have to bear. I have to disagree with their assessment that these people are not helpful, because I see them in a different light. But fortunately for me, it did not lead to the best consequences.

They were prepared to accept the realities in the newsroom, and for that I give them a lot of credit. And I also like to give credit to Lim Kim San, who was my chairman. He accepted my argument that we could not suppress our younger talented writers. So I'm grateful for the concession that they make to us.

So contrary to the popular opinion outside that government, in particular Lee Kuan Yew has total control of the media, that is not so. He was prepared to accept the realities and live with the consequences. In fact, there were one or two occasions when he wanted me to remove the editor from our newsroom, one from the Straits Times and one from Berita Harian. I resisted the idea and he did not push his way, so I respected him for that.

Jimmy
Let me turn to negotiating OB markers. On one hand, you have the journalistic instinct to break a good story. On the other hand, there are these limits to where the paper is willing to go. What is that principle that underlies how you make that decision?

Cheong
My job is to manage the interests of three stakeholders. The readers of the Straits Times, my customers. The government is another stakeholder and the third stakeholder is the newsroom, the journalists. The stakeholders may have different interests. My job is trying to balance those interests. I learn, fortunately, from the experiences of my predecessors. And there's one example which I like to share that tells you how you need to negotiate the different forces at play.

In 1977, Lee Kuan Yew made a visit to the Philippines and he and President Marcos came up with a very pivotal agreement. They agreed to slash tariffs of exports between the two countries to 10 percent. That was a major breakthrough because the PAP government's policy at that time, their goal was to bring about an ASEAN where goods can move about within ASEAN tariff-free.

There's a major, major breakthrough for Lee Kuan Yew, but unfortunately for us, a major story broke in Singapore. One guy stole a rifle from the army camp and helped people hostage, and that hostage drama took 72 hours.

The hostage crisis gripped the attention of the entire Singapore. The editor at the time, of course, succumbing to the instincts of a professional journalist, gave a lot of play to the hostage. But he also took care to put the tariff story on the front page. But that was not sufficient for Lee Kuan Yew because he felt by playing up the stories in that manner, we are signaling wrongly to ASEAN that is an agreement of little consequence.

As a journalist, guided by professional principles, you have to bear in mind that this is a story that interests the bulk of your population.

Jimmy
Absolutely.

Cheong
So you give it a lot of play on the front page. The lesson that I drew from that episode was that the Straits Times must also bear in mind the politics at play. Politics requires the right signaling. At [the] time, I was not in charge of the paper, but if I were now in charge of the paper and I [am] faced with the same situation, I would have redesigned the front page in such a way that gave equal prominence to the story, letting the political sensitivities be one of the issues that I would contend with in negotiating these boundaries.

Jimmy
Right? If it does, it is very hard to clearly see a guy taking a rifle and holding someone hostage. It’s very, very newsworthy.

Cheong
Another example, Jimmy, would be I suppose, a few months after I took over in 1987, another major story broke. The government had arrested a bunch of people and labelled them Marxists, the Marxist conspiracy in 1987. But I also do know that many of these people were active church activists. Were they social activists, do gooders, or were they people with a more sinister agenda?

Now, I had to be conscious about these two sides of the story, the government labelling them as sinister people, but another segment of society regarding them as social activists who did not deserve to be detained. So I’ve got these two narratives. What was my major consideration? How do I play this story? My first priority is to make sure that this episode will not lead to a collusion between the state and the Catholic Church, because if there were a collusion, the fabric of Singapore would be severely, severely damaged. We will puncture the social solidarity that we enjoy. So keeping that in mind helps in negotiating the OB markers.

So some people, for example, were disappointed with our coverage of the Marxists conspiracy. They felt that we had not given sufficient weight to the social activists’ point of view. We did articulate it, but we did not play it up because who are we to decide? Because I don't have the information that the government has.

So we were operating at a huge disadvantage vis-à-vis the government, and bearing in mind the need to avoid a collision, I had to accept the criticisms of some of my readers, not totally illegitimate that I had underplayed the story of the activists, but it's a price I have to pay, in my opinion, to protect the stability in Singapore.

Jimmy
In your opinion, and of course, it's just prognostications and crystal ball gazing. But in 10 years, what you know, what will the Straits Times look like? You know, 10, 20 years? Will the paper still be around? I mean, the internet has wiped out huge swaths of the media around the world, right? Singapore is no exception.

Cheong
I was heartened that the government decided to provide some funding because without funding, the Straits Times will further shrivel without the resources. So to me, that is a very important signal that the Straits Times does have a place in [the] future in Singapore. So how can we make use of this space that we are being provided with? And I felt that there's one way to do so.

Jimmy
I think that the government will continue doing this if it feels that there's a value in doing this, right? And so which means that the Straits Times needs to remain relevant to its readers. It needs to find some way to negotiate the new social media landscape and occupy a niche that is usefully played.

Do you think it is currently doing so?

Cheong
I believe that it can because I don't think that the government will fund SPH and not make sure that funding is fully justified. Justifications can only come from a service that the Straits Times and SPH provides, and it must provide a useful service to Singapore. Now I'm thinking in terms of serving the best interests of Singapore. That is a starting point, I think.

Jimmy
I don't disagree with you, but I think that really the challenge is, you know, getting people interested in reading about the news, which even in its heyday was always, you know, so easy.

Cheong
A challenge, yes. But I believe that the problem is not insurmountable. My tried and tested method of tackling such problems is one word – talent. You have to find the right talent, the talent will deliver the results. And I believe that in Singapore, we have the ability to attract talent. We are an open society.

In my time, I had to look for talent not only within Singapore but outside Singapore. So we had a large foreign component in our team, and I cannot believe that we should not continue to do that. If you’re well-focused, I don't believe it’s an insurmountable problem, and talented people will deliver. I know that from experience.

Jimmy
I certainly hope you are right because, you know, I have many fond memories and many not so fond memories as well, but certainly many fond memories of the Straits Times. And it would be a shame if the Straits Times were not around in 10 years or whatever. It would be a tremendous shame.

And it is my hope that the Straits Times is able, in some way to find a relevance, and find some way towards profitability, which is important, right? Because if it's not profitable, it's not a going concern as a business. It's not going to survive.

Cheong
Well, Jimmy, I owe a lot to the Straits Times which has given me a wonderful career. And I sincerely believe that there is a place for the Straits Times in Singapore's future. But a lot also depends on how the newsroom reacts to the changes that are going around. And I believe that they can find a niche in the market.

It may not enjoy the same reach as it did before, but I think it will find enough readers and enough important readers to justify their existence.

Jimmy
Well, I certainly hope so. How did you know that you wanted to be a journalist?

Cheong
I had a wonderful job as a teacher in a primary school. I really enjoyed my time and I enjoyed going to [Teachers’] Training College because I enjoyed teaching. But when the opportunity to join the Straits Times arose, my colleagues were pressing me and said you'd be foolish not to go.

Jimmy
Really? Why?

Cheong
They felt that I would do better for myself if I'd move to the media industry than in teaching. Well, they were proven right, but I was also tempted by one point in the small ad that I saw and it said special grade $1,000 and above. To me it was a gold mine.

Jimmy
Okay. This was more than what you were getting paid as a teacher?

Cheong
Oh yes, oh yes. A lot. Five times more.

Jimmy
Oh, okay. I would have been...

Cheong
I would have left already. I was born a news junkie. I always enjoyed the news. In fact, in my secondary school years, I used to produce a newsletter for my neighbour’s handwritten newsletter. I picked up news items from the Straits Times and from the Reader's Digest magazines, and I put together a newsletter.

So I was a news junkie by nature. And then now you've got this carrot of a monetary incentive combined. It was irresistible and I was very fortunate that there was a panel headed by Wee Kim Wee who interviewed a bunch of us. And when I got a job, I left [teaching].

It turned out to be the correct thing to do because eight months after I joined the Straits Times, Singapore was in real deep trouble. Riots had broken up twice that year, July and September. Indonesian marines were planting bombs all over Singapore to intimidate Singaporeans, intimidate Malaysians. So I'll plunge into the deep end.

And it provided me with a real political education, something that I would not get if I'd been doing some other work. So that was what anchored me to the industry.

Jimmy
It’s very seductive, right? The front row seat into the making of history.

Cheong
Yes, that's right. And subsequently the decision to move turned out to be correct because it gave me a rare opportunity which not many people get the opportunity to see at close range. How the founding generation of Singapore worked, and developing a relationship with them that gave me further insights into how Singapore grew and [I] enjoyed their friendship. There was something precious.

Jimmy
In your entire career, you know who was the person that you know left its biggest mark? The greatest intellectual impact.

Cheong
No doubt whatsoever who that person is. Lee Kuan Yew. He is a giant of a man.

He taught me one very major lesson – that whatever you face, always start by looking at the big picture. He did not tell me in those terms, but I could see that was how he operated. He always looked at the big picture. He always looked at the geopolitics before he decided to make his political decision.

And that was a major valuable lesson. I learned that whatever challenge you may have, the challenge would diminish in size if you are able to see the big picture.

Jimmy
Obviously, knowing the big picture then allows you to make better decisions.

Cheong
Yes, because life is all about managing different interests. As I said, I deal with the interests of three stakeholders:, the readers, the government and the journalists. And all three have got different agendas. How do you deal with these conflicting demands of your shareholders? You can't deal with it if you don't have the big picture. So that helped me a lot.

Jimmy
I hope I'm not too old to learn this lesson and apply it in my own life. Cheong, thank you for coming on the BiblioAsia+ podcast. It was really a pleasure having you. Cheong's new book, Ink and Influence: An OB Markers Sequel, is now available in bookstores everywhere. Of course, you can borrow it from the library as well.

And of course, his original book OB Markers: My Straits Times Story is not available in bookstores. It is available in the library for you to borrow.

Cheong
And it's also available on Kindle.

Jimmy
Both editions?

Cheong
No, no, the first book OB Markers.

Jimmy
Oh, it's available on Kindle.

Cheong
That is available on Kindle, because when I was pressing the Straits Times, when are you going to do a reprint, because if you're not going to do a reprint, the copyright reverts to me entirely

Jimmy
Yes.

Cheong
They don't want to lose the copyright. So they come to me by saying that I put it on Kindle.

Jimmy
Oh, okay. Okay.

Cheong
That was a very brilliant move on their part.

Jimmy
Cheong, thank you once again for coming on the show. And it's been a pleasure having you and I wish you good luck in your future endeavours.

Cheong
Thank you Jimmy, it has been an interesting experience today.

Jimmy
If you’ve enjoyed this episode, subscribe to this podcast and the BiblioAsia newsletter. Thanks for joining us on BiblioAsia+.

[Music playing]

If you’ve enjoyed this episode, subscribe to this podcast and the BiblioAsia  newsletter. Thanks for joining us on BiblioAsia+.

Cheong Yip Seng, OB Markers: My Straits Times Story (Singapore: Straits Times Press, 2013).

Cheong Yip Seng, Ink and Influence: An OB Markers Sequel (Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., 2025).

This episode of BiblioAsia Podcast was hosted by Jimmy Yap and produced by Soh Gek Han. Sound engineering was done by Nookcha Films. The background music "Di Tanjong Katong" was composed by Ahmad Patek and performed by Chords Haven. Special thanks to Cheong Yip Seng for coming on the show.

The BiblioAsia Podcast by the National Library Singapore tells stories about Singapore history.