Blog Response 4: "Hip youth club on the way"
Category: Issues regarding teenagers
vvvStart Word Count!vvv
Personally, I think it is a pretty good idea. However, how practical is this idea for a "Hip Youth Club"?
Firstly, the youth club has to be able to attract the young crowd. How will it do this? It will have to appeal to the interests of youths all over Singapore. However, not all youths have the same interest. Some may be more inclined to books, some more athletic, and some might be computer gamers. There is a whole lot more to list. How will this youth club cater to all of them?
In my opinion, there will most likely be different areas for each interest. For example, a reading corner for those who enjoy reading. Maybe even discussion rooms for those who are doing close reading or reading the book for school. However, since it is almost impossible to cater for all interests, how will they choose which ones to include?
Hopefully, they will be choosing those that are most popular. Lets say out of all the sports, soccer is the most popular, they can then devote a large area to those that are looking for a place to play.
The article says that the youth club will have to generate revenue. However, I hope it is not a case where they choose which interests to cater to mainly by profit. If they do so, they will get less people applying for membership and the youth club might be a failure. I do agree that youths are an untapped market. However, they must think the way we do. What are we looking for? Most likely, to find a place to hang out with friends or spend time doing something we like. If they think of us as customers, instead of teenagers, the club will most definitely fail.
Also, the club seems to be membership based, where access is only granted to members. If that is the case, I think it is a very bad idea to do so. Some people simply want to chat with friends and maybe play a sport. If they all have to pay for this, they will just go on to find some place else. Not all teenagers have the money needed to apply for membership. Maybe, the youth club can have areas where membership is needed, lets say, badminton courts, and areas where its free for all and anybody can use. That way they can maintain a balance. Also, if those people using the free areas are interested, they can apply for a membership. This way, they can attract youths and still achieve self-sustainability from membership fees.
To ensure the success of such a club, the people responsible for it must think like youths, or even better yet, are youths. That way they can appeal to teenagers and also know what we like or dislike. They must strike a balance between our interests and what we won't need or can't make use of.
^^^End Word Count!^^^
Words: 489
Also, does anyone find it ironic that the picture they put on the article is a wrinkly middle-aged (possibly old) man??
Think of the children! (um.. teenagers)
More talk on Singapore as a Global City
Blog Response 3: "SM Goh urges architects to turn S'pore into global city" (check out the video too)
Category: Politics
A sort of follow up on blog response 2.
|vvv|Start Word Count!|vvv|
In the article, we can see that SM Goh is mainly focused on how infrastructure will help Singapore develop into a global city. He emphasises a cosmopolitan city with a strong Asian core. This is all very easy to say, but how are we to do this?
To be a global city, we have to have high economic output and also have diversity of culture. Singapore has already achieved a considerably high amount of economic output, meaning we are half the way there. Infrastructure will attract investors, but how will infrastructure improve Singapore in the cultural and social aspect?
Having visually pleasing buildings is not the main point. They have to be functional and contribute to the big picture. Thus, buildings will have to be innovative to maximise space, visually pleasing, but functional too.
The first step is to plan. Singapore is too small. If we make a mistake it would be hard to reverse.
Currently, Singapore is seen as a “Global Niche City” (source, scroll down to the bottom). Our niche is the economic aspect, this means that our cultural, social and political aspects are lacking. I believe SM Goh is aiming to be a “Well rounded global city” and with a “very large contribution”.
To improve upon our cultural aspect means to accept other cultures and cater to them. As we can see from GaWC’s list, there are global cities with cultural bias. Singapore obviously does not want to be seen in that light. Thus, we need infrastructure to allow people from other cultures to come to Singapore. A foreign language school, such as Japanese School in Singapore, would be one example of something that caters to another culture. We may need infrastructure that helps integrate these people into Singapore.
How about the social aspect? I am not entirely sure on what this may mean, but I believe it means policies in the government that help the public in a certain way. This would mean that to be a well-rounded global city, we would have to change some of the policies that we may have now. However, I think Singapore is on the way to this goal with existing policies such as edusave, medisave, etc. These can be seen as helping the public, so I think they would be under the social aspect.
Singapore’s political system is okay in my opinion, but I believe it could be improved on. The areas most people think may need work on are probably human rights and civil liberties. Currently, people in Singapore have less freedom in some areas, such as freedom of speech. We are disallowed from voicing our opinions, particularly on political subjects.
Using good planning, new and innovative infrastructure and improving upon our lacking points, Singapore can become a well-rounded global city. However, infrastructure is not the only method to being a global city. Many other aspects of Singapore must be looked at, not just the physical aspects. By doing so, we can revise Singapore and keep ourselves "relevant and ahead of the competition".
Words: 499