Sundays are usually slow.
So, I made my way to work and found that I was one of the early birds. So, when I chilled out with my buddy Andrew at his desk, I took a copy of the New Straits Times and browsed through it.It was Saturday's issue and I came across an interesting article about a German food outlet in Capital Square.
It was written by a reporter in the 'Six' section (Started by me when I moved to Straits Times from the Malay Mail) who uses a pseudonym.
Now, what struck me was the fact that a picture of pork was used. Sometime back, I was told by the management there that usage of food depicting non-halal dishes should be stopped.
The NST it seems, cannot glorify the consumption of pork.
To add more irony to this, the writer who penned out the particular piece is a Malay lady. I know this for a fact because she was brought in by the former Life and Times editor who oversees the NST's feature section as well as other important leisure products of the daily.
The said writer uses her real name and pseudonym for reasons that are very clear: alcohol and pork are no-nos for a Muslim reporter.
I don't know if she actually ate pork knuckles and bacon in her feature article, but her pseudonym appears frequently in stories that glorifies drinking and pork eating.
So, what happened to the blanket ban on glorifying pork consumption? Better still, did the NST honchos knew that one of their Malay writer is happily boozing away and at the same time, glorifying pork dishes they openly detest?
Again, I am puzzled. If I read between the lines, the racist slant plays its role. Non-Malays cannot write about non-halal food while the Malays are getting away with it.
This is very wrong.
Anyways, all good things said and done, the writer was smart enough to use a pseudonym to drink beer and eat pork rather than doing it outright in the open, so, who says eating pork is bad?