AIA, A*star, Nestle: cheapskates united.

What do AIA, A*star and Nestle have in common? Think hard. I would be surprised if anyone had noticed it...but you never know, perhaps someone has spotted the same thing that we have.

Think about it a moment. What have each of these organizations done? More precisely, what kind of imagery have each of these organizations used?

No wiser? Well, I will tell you: each of them has run adverts containing apparently prodigious young chemists. Now, for any of you who have been paying attention these past couple of years, that will have a familiar ring to it. Those who are regular readers of this blog will know that, in actuality, there is only one prodigious young chemist in Singapore (in fact, there is only one presently known in the world)...my son, Ainan. It is strange, therefore, that these three organizations should choose to "create" fictional advertisements containing the imagery of prodigious young chemists. You see, in the real world, they just aren't that abundant...in fact, there is only one around at this time. What they are doing, therefore, is stealing an image from the real world: Ainan in a Chemistry lab - and cloning it for an advertisement using "a generic child in a Chemistry lab". It is not clever. It is another instance of Singaporean copying, in fact. It is also dishonest on several levels. Firstly, in the real world, these prodigious young Chemists don't exist (they are extremely uncommon...); secondly, the one that does exist could have been asked to do the ads (this would have have shown integrity - but they don't have any); thirdly, they have exaggerated the situation to an absurd degree, distorting everyone's understanding of the truth of Singaporean education.

Let us look at the ads more closely. Nestle used a mixed race boy (he looked a cross between Malay and Chinese, to my eyes), in a Milo ad, placed in a Chemistry lab. He looked to be about eight years old. This came out last year and is an OBVIOUS theft of imagery from another mixed race boy - Ainan Celeste Cawley - who, in real life, was eight years old, and spending his time in a Chemistry lab. We were disgusted to see this ad for two reasons: firstly, it had stolen Ainan's life story and used it to sell Milo (something he would never drink, for reasons which should be obvious to anyone who knows anything about what is good to drink); secondly, other companies such as Brand's Essences actually SPONSOR the people whose images they use (they have a long running campaign using PSLE success stories). By comparison to Brand's, therefore, Nestle look like dishonest, unscrupulous CHEAPSKATES...who utterly lack integrity.

Funny enough, I rang the Milo marketing department to complain about this use of imagery. The spokeswoman claimed that it was "creative license"...and then backtracked to claim that "no-one in our entire marketing department has ever read of Ainan and we don't have time to watch TV". I found this darkly funny. They are a marketing department. They are supposed to be kept informed about what is going on in the world - but they claim that no-one in the entire Nestle marketing team had read a newspaper in the last couple of years and that they had all missed the twenty or so articles that had appeared in various newspapers in that time. She also claimed that none of them watched Channel News Asia (he had been on that before the ads came out). So, we are supposed to believe that the marketing department is completely uninformed and so overlooked Ainan and COINCIDENTALLY created exactly the same imagery. Isn't it rather more likely that the Singaporean staff stole his image and copied it, right down to the detail of using a mixed race boy of the same age? Nestle's marketing team are either stupid and lazy (their own excuse) or dishonest, lying plagiarists (the more likely interpretation).

She then covered herself with a very funny remark. She said: "Even if we had read the articles, they made no impression on us at all."

Great. They had such a lack of impression that they ended up copying the imagery exactly. I am left to conclude that either they are a deluded bunch...or a lying bunch. Perhaps they are both.

The A*star ads ran on TV and showed two young chemists - a boy and a girl - of about seven years old, in a lab setting doing experiments. Then it showed them grown up and gave them real life names. Now, to me, this looks even more dishonest. It is saying that a prodigious childhood as chemists was the true story of these children, who are now adult researchers - and I am sure that that is not true. Were it so, we would know about it from other sources. So, this kind of lie involves REWRITING the history of its researchers to be like Ainan is. Again, this form of lying to the public distorts the truth of Singaporean education and gives the impression that Singapore is stuffed full of prodigious chemists - when it only has ever had one.

The most recent example of this tendency to steal imagery and abuse the life story of Ainan comes from AIA. They have run ads today in the Today newspaper showing three very young children - they look to be about six years old - doing chemistry lab work. Again, this is dishonest imagery. There are NO six year olds doing chemistry lab work in Singapore - not one. The only one who did so was Ainan. However, now, they have a whole bunch of them, in the image. This projects a lie about Singaporean youngsters. The copy line is "We are nurturing the world of tomorrow"...what RUBBISH! If they were, really, nurturing the world of tomorrow they would have sponsored AINAN for the ad and not stolen his imagery to use with other kids. AIA is not supporting anything but AIA - and the lie that Singapore's education has somehow achieved world supremacy.

What this use of a type of image which became current in Singapore before any of these ads came out, when Ainan started appearing, featured in chemistry labs, doing chemistry work, at the age of 7, in national and international newspapers, shows is that AIA, Nestle and A*star lack integrity in their marketing. It also shows that they are not above reworking the life story of a Singaporean child to make marketing copy for themselves. The images used are true of only one child in Singapore - Ainan - yet none of these organizations contacted us. They could have done so and could have sponsored Ainan. Now, this is a very serious point. HAD they used Ainan for the images, then the images would have been TRUE. They would have shown the truth to the world. Instead, they preferred to lie to the world. It was easily within reach of them to have adverts that had been made with integrity and that had not abused anyone. However, they preferred images which were lies, instead of the truth they were based on.

In more honest countries, with more honest organizations, Ainan would have been sponsored by these organizations to do the ads. That would have been the fair thing to do. As it is, however, they chose to steal his image, and use it to advertise their products, without credit to him, using child models in his place. Presumably, these cheapskates thought it cheaper to steal his image and make a fake "reality" than to use a real person and have to pay a sponsorship fee. Ultimately, however, they have, to my mind, damaged their image, by demonstrating that they value a few dollars more than they do the truth. They would rather lie cheaply...than to tell the truth at a fair price.

My response to this: never buy AIA products; never eat Nestle foods (including Milo)...and forget about A*star. I prefer to find companies with integrity to do business with.

What is most interesting about this is that these three organizations are all very large and very rich. They could easily have afforded to sponsor Ainan rather than steal his image. Brand's Essences are, to my knowledge, a much smaller concern...yet they are HONEST enough to directly sponsor PSLE students to appear in their campaigns. They don't MOCK UP models to LOOK LIKE the students. They do business the honest way...so why can't the big boys do so, too? It seems that the richer they are, in Singapore, the cheaper - and more dishonest - they get.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to:http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.

IMDB is the Internet Movie Database for film and tv professionals.If you would like to look at my IMDb listing for which another fifteen credits are to be uploaded, (which will probably take several months before they are accepted) please go to: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3438598/ As I write, the listing is new and brief - however, by the time you read this it might have a dozen or a score of credits...so please do take a look. My son, Ainan Celeste Cawley, also has an IMDb listing. His is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3305973/ My wife, Syahidah Osman Cawley, has a listing as well. Hers is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication prohibited. Use Only with Permission. Thank you.)

Does Singapore take a long-term view?

I wonder, often, at the decision-making we have seen, in Singapore, with regards to Ainan. So often, the decisions don't seem to have been taken with any vision or perspective on what Ainan could be, given the right support. No doubt, to a lesser extent, other parents of gifted children, have experienced elements of the same problems that we have faced. Yet, I find it strange that anyone should experience any such problems at all. The only thing that would be needed for such problems to go away, would be a little vision and ability to look ahead, by those empowered to (but disinclined to) help.

Ainan was put into contact with ASTAR, the research institute, by a journalist. We went to meet them and a lot of pleasant things were said and a certain hopefulness about the future was created in us. Yet, since that time, about a year ago, nothing has happened, at all. There has been no initiative from ASTAR, at all. Anyway, Ainan and I have a project that we wanted backing for: a project that would lead to interesting scientific results. So, we approached our contacts at ASTAR for backing for the project. We received a swift and definite "No.", despite the fact that the Director at ASTAR didn't even know the details of the project in question. It was something that they could have enabled and which would have led to a useful and interesting outcome - but they were not interested in facilitating it. This is typical of the way we have been treated in Singapore: our requirements and initiatives have frequently met with a "No.", even if the "No." doesn't make sense when set beside the facilities and capacities that exist within the institution itself. This is a pity. Singapore is a place with a local reputation for being "No.1" but an international reputation for being a bastion of mediocrity. So, which is true? The local impression of being "No.1" - or the international reputation of being mediocre? Who is more likely to be accurate in their assessment? If, Singapore is, indeed, mediocre on the world stage (note I don't say the South East Asian stage, to which Singapore often compares itself), could the cause be the Singaporean institutional reaction to anyone who wants to do something new? There is an automatic tendency to say "No." here to anyone who seeks to achieve something that is non-standard, or unexpected. There is no room to allow the unorthodox to thrive or grow. Ainan is a one-off - an unusual case, indeed - and they seem not to know what to do with regards to him. Well, should they not be guided by what he wants to do? Should they not enable those things for him...instead of resisting his progress? Would that not lead to all the creative outcomes they SAY they want (but actually do nothing to enable, and much to oppose)?

Singapore will remain forever mediocre as long as the mediocrities in charge, oppose the rise of those who have something to offer, in ways which are new, or different. There must be space, in this oh-so-conformist society, for those who are different, for those who don't fit in to the standard mould. Not only must there be space for them, but there must be resources available to them, to allow them to fulfil their goals. Singapore would benefit immeasurably were it a place that facilitated the creative people in their midst, instead of opposing them, through either indifference, or deliberate obstructiveness.

Ainan has ideas. Ainan has projects he wishes to make happen. However, if Singapore gets its institutional way, Ainan may either have to wait many years for them to happen, when he is an adult - or until another country with more vision and more open-mindedness, offers him the chance to bring them to being. Perhaps, then, Singapore would realize the folly of its short-sightedness.

I feel that Singapore is a short-sighted nation, that does not take the long-term view of what its nation and citizens might be. What is important, here, is control of the population, now, at this time and not enabling the population to become whatever they may. Research here has short-sighted goals, directed, usually towards short-term financial returns. Education here is about becoming a cog in the economic machine - and not becoming a thinker and creator, who could make something new. Everything that we have learnt through experience, about the education system and scientific infrastructure, indicates that people here, do not think of what might become, in the future, if they facilitate those with promise, in the present. There is, however, an over-arching need to try to ensure that everyone conforms to expectation: all must be within the norms. Unusual requests, of any kind, of any local institution (except for the Singapore Polytechnic) tend to be denied, without much thought. It is clear, that they are not thinking ahead.

Given that ASTAR refused to support Ainan on his project, I think it very likely that Ainan would choose not work with ASTAR when he grows up. Why would he, when they have showed their lack of vision, already?

In a way, there is a benefit to this. All those institutions which choose not to facilitate Ainan's projects now are all places that he won't waste time working for in the future. They are basically selecting themselves in, or out, of his future path. They are showing him, now, the kind of place that they are. So, in a sense, I am as thankful for every "No." that we receive, as every "Yes.". Each "No." is as informative, as each "Yes." The negative answers show us which doors not to knock on again, when he grows up. The positive answers show us who is worth thinking of for the long-term.

I do wonder, though, how many doors will be worth knocking on, by the time Ainan is an adult. Some doors that one would expect to be open (or which pretend to be) turn out to be unworthy of a knock. Again, I see that Singapore is just not thinking of the long-term. Institutions here don't realize that if they block Ainan, now, that he will not work with them, in the future. I don't see any benefit to them, to that.

We will keep knocking on doors. We will keep trying to make Ainan's projects happen and keep his interests engaged. We will learn who is worth our time, and who is not. However, we have already learnt that institutions that one would have thought would have a long-term view, do not. These are valuable lessons. If they don't have a long-term view with regards to Ainan, they won't have a long-term view with regards to their research either. So, they are not likely to be places worth researching with. It is a valuable selection process.

Perhaps, part of this is because of a difference of perspective. I know Ainan very well. I know what he is. I know what he is becoming. I know, very, very well, how well he thinks scientifically and creatively. I know how much he has to offer. ASTAR, for instance, does not seem to understand that. They haven't delved enough to realize what they are missing. However, I find it amusing that one day they are certain to realize their oversight - when it is too late to do anything about it. Ainan will have found a more open-minded institution to work with. There is no time, in life, to waste on persuading those who cannot immediately see the value in the request, we have put to them. It is better to ask someone else...until some other says "Yes."

I take a long-term view, of all things. It is interesting to see how few people do, in Singapore. In the long-term, Ainan should be of great value as a scientist. It remains to be seen which institutions, in Singapore, will have shown themselves worthy of consideration as a research home, for him. Will any have done so? We will see.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.)

Reserved silence and social maturity

I had the privilege to observe Ainan, yesterday, in an impromptu classroom situation.

It was at a Science Show in the Mall event. These are events put on by the Science Centre and ASTAR - Singapore's Agency for Science Technology and Research (I think that is how it goes).

It was an all afternoon affair, but it was the end of it, that drew my attention.

Ainan sat with perhaps 50 other kids, listening to the presenters who were asking scientific questions of the audience. At every question, one, two or three kids would raise their hands, their faces straining to be the one chosen to answer. Ainan, however, was much cooler than that. He sat, with his mother and, instead of raising his arm would lean over to her and relay the answer to her.

I was some distance away but I could read the answers on his lips. Then another child would be chosen to answer. They would go up, answer the question into a mike, then receive a prize. Ainan, however, didn't rise to this particular bait - prize or no prize, he never let his arm rise into the air. He just leant over and answered each of the perhaps twenty questions to his mother. He made no effort to draw the presenters attention to himself, he didn't shout out an answer nor raise his arm.

I thought this very revealing. It seems that Ainan has learnt the social value of discretion. What benefit would come to him from answering all the questions? He would learn nothing more - but he might alienate the other children. So, what did he do instead? He answered none of them publicly - yet I could see that he knew the answers. He was taking a more discrete path.

I found myself impressed by this. It seems that he has acquired a certain social wisdom in the past year. He has learnt that it is better to be discrete than to shout out one's knowledge. He is more likely to have friends that way, and more likely to be accepted. He has, it seems, no need for the ego boost that comes from being seen to be the one who knows. He, instead, prefers to know that he knows - and to let his mother know, too. That is enough for him.

Ainan is, it seems, learning how to adjust to the social world rather more effectively than I had hoped. Relatively few gifted children learn to be this discrete, so early on - after all Ainan is yet only 7. It is a hopeful sign, therefore, that he will be able to navigate the social issues ahead that he shall no doubt face.

I wonder how many teachers, however, would understand the quiet child, who knows but doesn't show that he knows? Most would misunderstand, of course. Yet, what he would lose from the teacher, he would gain from his fellows: so it might, indeed, be a fair trade. It is no good having one teacher on your side, when to do so, you lose 40 kids. That doesn't seem wise. Ainan has chosen the socially more enriching path. A reserved silence is what one can expect from this particular gifted child in the classroom.

What do you have to do to find out what's on his mind? Have a quiet chat with him, away from the multitude of observers. Then he will let his guard down.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged seven years and eleven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, four years and four months, and Tiarnan, twenty-one months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)