Singapore Matters faces backlash over non-apology on WP MPS falsehood

Pro-People's Action Party (PAP) Facebook page Singapore Matters has published a follow-up post addressing its earlier false claim that Workers' Party (WP) MPs hold Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS) only twice a month, but the reframing of the correction has drawn heavy public criticism.

In the post, published on the morning of Friday, 3 July 2026, Singapore Matters wrote: "Here's the updated post to correct an error in our earlier version. We apologise for the mistake and take this opportunity to thank the readers who took the time to point it out."

The page explained that its original post had arisen after some of its supporters criticised a PAP MP, calling him and his team "lazy" for not holding a fifth MPS in months with five Mondays. It then noted: "As it turns out, Workers' Party MPs also do not hold a fifth MPS. By the same logic, are they also lazy?"

The post went on to quote PAP volunteer David Neo, who described what his team does instead on a fifth Monday. "There is no MPS. Instead we gather as a community for some Learning and Growth," Neo wrote, describing volunteer data analysis, resident feedback sessions, and marking volunteers' service anniversaries.

The original post, which claimed WP MPs Pritam Singh, Gerald Giam and Kenneth Tiong hold MPS only twice a month, was removed after Tiong publicly rebutted it with each MP's full schedule, showing all three in fact hold four sessions monthly across two venues each.

The follow-up post drew more than 270 comments, with a large share characterising it as a "non-apology" that used the occasion to promote the PAP rather than correct the record on WP MPs specifically. One commenter wrote that the post seemed to "start off with an apology and then proceed to belittle WP and self-praise PAP."

Another commenter said the post "feels more like a promotion for PAP," noting that more than two-thirds of its length concerned what a PAP MP does on the fifth Monday rather than the correction itself.

A third commenter called it "incredibly hypocritical" for the page to invoke accuracy and transparency when it "only took down your post because you got publicly called out for lying," describing the fifth-Monday explanation as "a weak, defensive distraction."

Distance runner Soh Rui Yong, one of the few commenters to use his public profile, wrote that the page "knows how to lie but not how to apologise properly," calling the episode "gutter politics."

Other commenters argued the page had simply shifted its narrative rather than addressing the original falsehood directly.

A recurring theme among commenters was a call for the page to be renamed. Several suggested it be called "PAP Matters" instead, with one writing that the page should "change your name to PAP matters… and don't hide behind the wall."

Commenters repeatedly cited Singapore Matters' history of publishing inaccuracies about the WP. In May 2025, AFP's fact-checking service found the page had published a graphic falsely attributing a quote to WP candidate Siti Alia Abdul Rahim Mattar during the 2025 General Election (GE2025) campaign, a claim later traced to a rally speech in which she had said no such thing.

Also in May 2025, Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh separately rebuked an affiliated page, SG Matters, over a foreign policy post, referencing the AFP-flagged falsehood and warning against letting "partisan or self-appointed platforms" shape public discourse on national issues.

Commenters this week pointed to that pattern as evidence of a consistent slant, rather than isolated errors.

Some commenters called for further action, including police reports, defamation suits, or a correction order under the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA), echoing calls made after the original MPS post. POFMA directions can only be issued by government ministers, not individual MPs.

Not all reactions were critical. One commenter urged others to "be gracious to small mistakes that do not jeopardise integrity," while another said MPs and volunteers from both parties were, in their experience, hardworking, and that "the system overall" was the real issue rather than individual MPs.