Singaporean internet users were left upset after a British tabloid, The Sun, made a mistake in a Formula 1 (F1) graphic calendar published on June 1. In the article, a Chinese flag was wrongly featured alongside Singapore, leading to controversy.

The error came to light when an unknown Facebook user shared a screenshot of the calendar in a group called “Complaint Singapore,” drawing attention to the mistake.

The graphic calendar, located at the end of the erroneous article, provides information about past and upcoming F1 Grand Prix events scheduled for 2023 across the world. One entry in the calendar discussed the possibility of Lewis Hamilton joining Ferrari if they significantly increased his salary, as claimed by an F1 expert.

Unfortunately, The Sun incorrectly used the flag of the People’s Republic of China to represent Singapore instead of Singapore’s own national flag. It is important to note that the article correctly mentioned the date and track for the Singapore Grand Prix 2023.

Once bitten twice shy, twice bitten ccb

Regrettably, The Sun repeated the same error in another article published on June 4. In the article’s cover image, they displayed China’s national flag instead of Singapore’s flag to represent the host countries for this year’s F1 races.

To clarify, it should be emphasized that China will not be hosting its Grand Prix in 2023 due to the ongoing challenges caused by the Covid-19 situation, as stated on the official website of F1.

Additionally, despite updating the graphic calendar to reflect the current stage of the championship, The Sun once again included the Chinese national flag alongside Singapore. This persistent error with the flags is worth noting.

Netizens’ comments

1. I am not surprised….I have foreigners asking me if Singapore is part of China. Soon they may be asking if we part of India
2. It’s Chinapore for quite some time..
3. Well the Sun isnt really rated as a newspaper so hardly a surprize
4. this show how ignorant the Sun are !
5. the sun is a terrible newspaper! Don’t sweat it. They get most things wrong!

Header image source: The Sun

Charles & Keith, a rapidly growing global brand, has garnered significant popularity worldwide. Apart from being endorsed by BlackPink, the brand’s imitations have also been observed in China previously.

Interestingly, yet another counterfeit Charles & Keith store has recently surfaced in China. This time, however, the store’s name is so perplexing that it is virtually unpronounceable.

A brief five-second video shared by a TikTok user @kenpgl showcased this store stumbled upon in China. The store’s appearance bore a striking resemblance to an authentic Charles & Keith store located in Singapore, catching the attention of the original poster.

Nonetheless, what truly stood out was the store’s name. Instead of the familiar ‘Charles & Keith’ sign, the store went by the name ‘Chfpibs & Kslth.’ While there were similarities to the genuine store’s name, it seemed like a haphazard combination of letters.

Understandably, netizens were left utterly perplexed by the peculiar name of the counterfeit store. Many found it exceedingly challenging to pronounce. Several TikTok users suggested that the store would have been better off choosing a completely different name.

Even Zoe Gabriel, an ambassador for Charles & Keith, expressed her bewilderment at the unusual name.

On the other hand, some individuals were impressed by the store’s remarkable ability to replicate the original Charles & Keith store’s appearance.

Netizens’ comments

1. i try to pronounce the name and my saliva fly all over the place sia
2. Charles and keith cousin
3. The phonics teacher in me is SCREAMING
4. I could’ve sworn they have Charles & Keith on taobao so shouldn’t they have stores there too?
5. the effort to make a proper name is zero hahaha
6. Sounds something that Sims would come up with
7. It was encrypted for data protection
8. “i bought this bag at fjswikfhsysklkdlt”
9. You know you’ve made it very big when people imitate your brand very closely
10. How can you read it, i think they want us to spell
11. This one what, Boggle ah

@kenpgl Familiar brand in China! #tiktoksg #fyp #foryoupage #singapore #exploresg #sgtiktok #china #charlesandkeith ♬ FEEL THE GROOVE – Queens Road, Fabian Graetz

A property company in Singapore recently caught the wrath of a potential customer after employing a unique marketing ploy that almost gave him/her a heart attack.

Disguised as a “saman” ticket, the promotional flyer was attached to the netizen’s car, complimenting the driver for “parking beautifully”.

Internet users quickly recognized the irony of the situation and praised the advertisement for its creativity.

On June 10th, a post detailing the encounter was shared on the Complaint Singapore Unrestricted Facebook page.

The OP expressed their disapproval of the property company’s marketing gimmick, labelling it as tasteless and devoid of humour. They went on to explain their frustration, stating, “No driver like to see this kind of joke on their windscreen (SIC)”

The OP further criticized the flyer as a “cheap marketing gimmick” that would stick to vehicle windshields if exposed to rain.

Contrary to the OP’s sentiments, netizens online praised the company for their creativity, with one netizen pointing out that the gimmick accomplished its intended purpose perfectly, while another said “any publicity is good publicity.” By voicing their complaints about the flyer, the OP inadvertently promoted the company without cost.

While some netizens agreed that it might not be the ideal advertising method because it might give some people unintended heart attacks, the majority of netizens still managed to find humour in the incident and the flyer.

Here is what the netizen said

Calling out *property agent’s name redacted* from *company name redacted* with Mobile number *phone number redacted*.

Got this on my windscreen. I must say that this is very lame and not funny at all! No driver like to see this kind of joke on their windscreen!

And you jolly well don’t litter with your cheap marketing gimmick on our cars! If it rains, this will stick on to the windscreen!

*company name redacted* pls use your brains!

Source: Facebook

A woman in Singapore recently found herself in a distressing situation after responding to an advertisement for too-good-to-be-true dim sum deals on Facebook.

The reader, driven by the allure of the cheap dumplings and egg rolls priced as low as S$1, ended up being scammed of about $24,000, according to a report by MustShareNews.

Told to download mysterious app

Upon contacting the seller through Facebook on 1 June, the reader was directed to continue the conversation on WhatsApp. It was through this messaging platform that the seller shared a link, urging her to download and install an app called ‘1st Mall v6.0’ to facilitate her purchase.

To proceed, she had to create an account using her name, email address, and phone number. However, the ordeal did not end there. The seller later demanded a S$5 deposit, which prompted the reader to reconsider the transaction due to the hassle involved.

As she noticed her phone heating up, the reader followed her daughter’s advice and temporarily powered off the device.

Upon switching it back on, she was bombarded with multiple WhatsApp messages from the persistent seller, urging her to complete the online order. Despite informing him of her change of mind, the seller persisted in his pursuit.

A conversation transcript shared with MS News highlighted the successive messages from the seller, which the reader eventually chose to ignore.

Frustrated by the lack of progress, the seller resorted to using his personal account to call the customer repeatedly, but she continued to disregard the calls. However, her concerns escalated when she received an alarming email.

$24k in bank account gone

The following morning, on 2 June, the reader opened an email from DBS, her bank, alerting her to suspicious transactions from her account.

Alarmed, she swiftly accessed her internet banking application and discovered three fraudulent transactions, totaling nearly S$24,000. Furthermore, she realized that her daily withdrawal limit had been raised to S$70,000.

She then contacted the bank, instructing them to freeze her account while also lodging an online police report, documenting the entire ordeal.

However at the moment, the bank has been unable to confirm if her money can be recovered, as the case remains under police investigation.

In addition to the unauthorized transactions, the reader received a notification regarding an unusual sign-in attempt on her Google account from a device located in the Philippines.

Intriguingly, the sign-in occurred on the same day she attempted to make the dim sum purchase. It is suspected that a hacker may have gained access to her account, changed her password, and subsequently infiltrated her internet banking account.

Left with no choice but to await updates from the relevant authorities, the MS News reader is determined to raise awareness about this scam to prevent others from falling victim to similar incidents.

Expressing her frustration, she believes that the bank should have been more vigilant, particularly regarding the sudden increase in her withdrawal limit.

She opines that the bank should have contacted her to verify the legitimacy of the significant transactions before processing them.

The Singapore Food Agency issued a statement saying that there are no recent food-borne illness cases in Singapore involving chicken rice, following a video post by YouTuber Angel Hsu where she conducted tests herself on 100 chicken rice stalls, claiming that almost half of the samples had exceeded the regulatory limits for the bacteria, E. coli.

SFA’s statement

Media reply on food safety of chicken rice

The Singapore Food Agency (SFA) monitors chicken rice stalls regularly as part of its Market Monitoring Program. This is done by collecting samples and testing for microbiological contamination to ensure food safety requirements are met. SFA adopts a science-based risk assessment and management approach which means
that food with higher risks is subjected to more stringent and frequent checks. This is the case for chicken rice.

Enforcement actions were taken on chicken rice stalls found to have failed SFA’s food safety limits. SFA also looks into public feedback on food safety. From 2020 to May 2023, SFA received 126 feedbacks on chicken rice stalls with subsequent enforcement actions taken against one stall for selling unsafe food. In addition, enforcement actions were taken against 22 other chicken rice stalls found to fail our standards under SFA’s Market Monitoring Programme. SFA will continue to educate chicken rice stallholders on microbiological safety and control measures for retail food.

Our surveillance in recent years shows that the rate of failure due to E. coli detections in chicken rice samples have decreased. In addition, there has been no reported foodborne illness cases involving chicken rice since 2020. SFA will continue to engage and remind the chicken rice stallholders on good food safety practices and
monitor these stalls to ensure that food safety requirements are met.

Food safety hazards in chicken rice

Common food safety hazards associated with chicken rice are mostly microbiological, such as Salmonella and Campylobacter. These bacteria, which cause food poisoning, can be found in raw chicken naturally. Chicken rice can also contain E. coli. While most strains of this bacteria do not cause illnesses, it is commonly used as an indicator for food safety as high levels of E. coli is linked to poor hygiene, cross-contamination, poor storage practices, insufficient cooking etc.

The common preparation method in Singapore of gently boiling the chicken in stock and quickly quenching the cooked chicken in iced/tap water can lead to undercooking, where bacteria can continue to survive. After cooking, the chickens are often displayed at room temperature over an extended period, which also allows
bacteria to grow. When chickens are sliced to serve, cross-contamination could occur from handling meat or through the chopping boards and other surfaces. Likewise, these risk factors can be applied to similar food stalls, such as those selling roasted meat and economy rice.

Source: SFA

Recap