2010s
Here is a list of Singapore newspaper articles from 2010 to 2019 that have been coded and analysed.
Newspaper Articles
Gan, E. (2017, March 1). Deaf doctor ready to lend an ear to patients. TODAY, p. 29. Retrieved July 1, 2026, from https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/digitised/article/today20170301-1.2.31.2
Themes
Codes:
-
audism
-
medical model of disability
-
social model of disability
-
inspiration porn
-
benevolence porn
-
supercrip narrative
-
counter-stereotype
Thematic Analysis
Medical model of disability
A few quotes imply that hearing loss is something to be fixed:
"Born profoundly deaf, Dr Joseph Heng was 12 when he received a bionic ear that introduced him to sounds he had never heard before – running water, the hum of an air-conditioner, a ringing telephone."
"The 31-year-old was one of the first few people here to undergo cochlear implantation, in which an electronic device is surgically implanted in the inner ear to stimulate the hearing nerve directly to perceive sound."
"While cochlear implants allow him to hear speech as clearly as a person with normal hearing, isolating sounds in noisy environments may sometimes pose a challenge. However, he has adopted strategies to allow him to work efficiently in the hospital setting."
Audism
A few quotes imply that success is achieved by adopting hearing norms:
"Today, the technology has done more than just help him fit into the hearing world"
"Introduced him to sounds he had never heard before"
"I've never taken hearing and the gift of spoken language for granted. (Being born with a hearing impairment) has given me a different perspective of patient needs and helped me better understand the communication barriers they face."
Inspiration porn
The narrative is about a deaf child who receives a cochlear implant. He overcomes challenges and becomes a doctor. This resembles the typical "overcoming disability" story.
The article portrays Dr Heng as exceptional rather than examining why healthcare, education, and society create barriers for deaf people generally.
It hints at inspiration porn because the underlying message can become:
“If this deaf person became a doctor, everyone else should overcome their obstacles too.”
The focus is less on systemic barriers and more on extraordinary personal perseverance.
Supercrip narrative (subset of inspiration porn)
"He has since achieved a Grade 8 in piano, earned a string of As in his O- and A-Level examinations, and completed bio-engineering and medical degrees in the United States."
"He completed his National Service despite an exemption due to his disability. And when he could not get into National University Hospital's medical school, he persevered and later completed a medical degree at Yale".
A stereotype category in disability studies which portrays Dr Heng for overcoming his disability in ways that are viewed by the public as inspiring and as a hero. There is also praise for doing everyday activities that hearing people do, which reflects low expectations on what people with disabilities can do.
Benevolence porn
Celebrates Dr Heng's mother's sacrifices as evident from "School of Mum". His mother devised tough drills to help him learn to speak aloud and cope with mainstream schooling.
Example:
"My brother and I went to school in the morning. In the afternoon, it was the School of Mum. She would extensively go through everything we learnt in school at the time, repeat everything and do her own form of speech therapy with us," Dr Heng said. "
"Without that unwavering perseverance and discipline, [...] said he might not have come this far."
Social model of disability
Some of Dr Heng's quotes hint at social model concepts
"communication barriers"
"every patient wants to be heard"
"He feels that the misperception that people with disabilities cannot do as well as others stems from culture. The United States...takes a more egalitarian view towards people with disabilities, he said. "That has helped promote a culture of acceptance whereas in Singapore, it's like 'Aiyah, that person in a wheelchair will never grow up to be anything lah," he said."
Dr Heng argues that the problem is not deafness itself but attitudes, stereotypes, and communication barriers.
Counter-stereotype
A positive theme is the challenge to stereotypes.
Dr Heng explicitly contests assumptions that disabled people are less capable:
“misperception that people with disabilities cannot do as well as others stems from culture”
The article offers a counter-narrative in the form of physician, husband, father, professional.
This representation can be empowering because it expands public understanding of what deaf people can do.
Tan, S.-A. (2017, December 5). The deaf community sees red over signs. The Straits Times, p. 4. Retrieved from https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/digitised/article/straitstimes20171205-1.2.32.4
Themes
Codes:
Language policing
Institutional Authority
Deaf perspectives
Competing Institutional Authorities
Linguistic discrimination (or linguicism)
Ableism and Audism
Medical model
Social model
Cultural model of deaf identity
different ideologies
media responsibility
Thematic Analysis
This article is not merely about only “wrong signs”. It is about who has the authority to represent a language and a linguistic minority.
Language policing
There is institutional language policing but it is more about protecting the integrity of a minority language rather than being about only “wrong signs” or correcting someone’s signs.
The Singapore deaf community argues that:
-
SgSL is a natural language
-
SEE is a manually coded form of English, not a natural sign language
-
Teaching SEE as “sign language” misinforms the public
-
Public institutions should accurately represent SgSL
Institutional Authority
The Singapore Association for the Deaf presents itself as an authority throughout the article. However, it does so by drawing on its role as a representative organisation and by positioning the deaf community as the legitimate source of knowledge about SgSL. It is not simply claiming authority because it is an organisation. It supports that authority through expertise, representation and advocacy.
It establishes institutional legitimacy by identifying itself as the representative body for the deaf community - “The association, which represents individuals who are deaf or hard-of-hearing…”
“...said the signs were ‘inaccurate…” - positions itself as capable of judging linguistic accuracy.
“...the trainer is not on the association’s list of sign language instructors.” - This implies that the association maintains standards and recognises qualified instructors. It suggests that instructors from other organisations are not qualified.
“Moreover, the trainer was demonstrating SEE and not SgSL…” - claims expertise in distinguishing between different signing systems
“SgSL has its own grammar and linguistic structure…” - Presents linguistic knowledge here.
Open letter to the PA explaining why SEE is not SgSL - SADeaf takes on the role of educating public institutions about appropriate signing practices.
Advocating for SgSL to become Singapore’s official sign language - it positions itself as an advocate shaping language policy.
The association is claiming a few kinds of authority:
-
linguistic (identifying what counts as SgSL versus SEE)
-
Community authority (speaking on behalf of deaf people in Singapore)
-
Moral authority (explaining why terms such as “deaf mute” are offensive and perpetuates stereotypes)
-
Institutional authority (maintaining a recognised list of instructors and engaging with public agencies.
Deaf perspectives
The article doesn’t rely only on the association statements. It quotes deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals:
Mr Alvan Yap explains why SEE is not used naturally by deaf people
Ms Lily Goh explains the history and uniqueness of SgSL
The quotes reinforce the association’s position by grounding it in deaf lived experience, not institutional authority.
Competing Institutional Authorities
The Singapore Association for the Deaf constructs itself as an authoritative voice on Singapore Sign Language asserting its representative role within the deaf community.
It evaluates the trainer’s linguistic competence, maintains a recognised list of instructors, and provides expert explanations of the differences between SgSL and SEE. Its authority is further strengthened through quotations from deaf community members, whose lived experiences support the association’s claims.
At the same time, the article reveals competing forms of authority, with the People’s Association relying on institutional qualifications while the deaf association emphasises community expertise and linguistic authenticity.
The PA respects the association’s authority but it may not signal full acceptance as can be seen in this quote:
“Nevertheless, we have noted the feedback, and concur that there could be more alignment with the SgSL curriculum.
PA acknowledges the association’s concerns, accepts there is some validity, recognises SgSL as an important reference point. They say:
“PA will evaluate and look forward to the opportunity to work with your organisation to strengthen this alignment in building a more inclusive community together.”
This is significant because it positions the association as a legitimate stakeholder and potential partner. Instead of dismissing the criticism, PA expresses their willingness to collaborate. However, PA does not fully defer to the association as the sole authority. PA states: “PA requires course instructors to show proof of their qualifications, and their ability to conduct courses…”
PA is defending its own decision-making. It implies that PA has its own standards for determining instructor competence. The instructor was selected through PA’s internal processes and the association’s list of instructors is not presented as the only valid benchmark.
PA also says “there could be more alignment..” instead of admitting they were wrong. “PA will evaluate…” instead of PA outright saying they will adopt the association’s recommendations. This preserves PA’s institutional authority while acknowledging the association’s expertise.
Linguistic discrimination (or linguicism)
The article contrasts SgSL as a community language, developed naturally, has its own grammar and tied to deaf identity, whereas SEE is based on spoken English, created by hearing educators and designed to represent English visually.
This reflects the prioritisation of spoken/written languages over signed languages. The article shows language discrimination.
Ableism and Audism
The term “deaf mute” assumes that deafness automatically means inability to speak. This reflects deficit thinking.
Also, SEE historically emerged partly because educators wanted deaf children to conform more closely to spoken English. This shows an ableist assumption that spoken language is the ideal. (linguicism)
Examples include:
-
Hearing people deciding what sign language should be.
-
Hearing people teaching sign language without deep knowledge.
-
Television presenting inaccurate information
-
Calling deaf people “deaf mute”
These all position hearing perspectives as more authoritative than deaf experience.
The quote: “What gets our goat is seeing people who are not deaf…going on TV to teach sign language”. This is really about authority, authenticity and lived experience, not simply qualifications.
Medical model
-
It is obvious that hearing people view deaf people through what they lack such as the use of the term “deaf mute”
Social model
The article strongly aligns with the social model. For example the statement “We are not looking for any help. But we need to be empowered”. Advocates for respect and patience from hearing people. shows that the environment has attitudinal barriers.
Cultural model of deaf identity
A central theme
Ms Lily Goh said “SgSL has a history of around 60 years.”
“It is unique to Singapore”
This frames SgSL not merely as communication but as history, heritage, identity, community.
This reflects the cultural model of deaf people where deaf communities are viewed as linguistic and cultural minorities instead of simply groups with disabilities.
Different ideologies
SEE historically supports English. Integration into hearing society.
SgSL supports inclusion in hearing society while preserving deaf identity
Media responsibility
The article criticises the media for misinformation, inaccurate terminology, and amplifying incorrect teaching.
Television reaches large audiences. Therefore, mistakes can reinforce misconceptions.
Lim, Y. H. (2013, March 2). He helps world hear the deaf. The Straits Times, p. 15. Retrieved from https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/newspapers/digitised/article/straitstimes20130302-1.2.57.11.1
Themes
Codes:
Benevolence porn
Social model of disability
Thematic Analysis
The article "He helps world hear the deaf" is a 2013 Straits Times profile of Zach Tay, one of four full-time sign-language interpreters in Singapore.
Benevolence porn
The headline itself ("He helps world
hear the deaf") frames Tay as a savior figure. The article centers his perspective and feelings ("enriching and fulfilling job") rather than the experiences of deaf people. Deaf individuals appear as passive recipients of his help, and the piece emphasises his personal journey and sacrifice.
The piece highlights his ingenuity (inventing signs for words like "photosynthesis"), positions him as someone who "bridges the communication gap," and emphasises that he is not hearing-impaired himself, which underscores the outsider/hearing person-coming-to-rescue dynamic.
There is also no voice from deaf people in the article. The 500,000 hearing-impaired Singaporeans are mentioned as a statistic that amplifies the scale of the problem he is solving, not as a community with its own perspectives.
Overall, the hero framing is real and deliberate. The article is structured around a hearing person's feelings about helping deaf people, with deaf people appearing only as beneficiaries of his work.
Social model of disability
The article highlights an underrecognised occupation (only four interpreters nationwide) rather than only positioning Tay as an exceptional hero. The article notes systemic gaps (lack of interpreters, varying communication needs among deaf people).