Why cite media site that linked hacked info?

More than 300,000 people on K Box's membership scheme are affected by the leak.
More than 300,000 people on K Box's membership scheme are affected by the leak. PHOTO: ST FILE

BERNARD LEONG

(ST) journalist Pearl Lee ("K Box members feeling angry and insecure"; Sept 17) has named (online site) The Real Singapore as one of the media outlets that had received K Box membership information. Her editors might not be aware that the "report" on TRS contains a hyperlink to allow readers to download the stolen K Box database? This is downright irresponsible of ST. In addition, I do not think TRS deserves any mention by a respectable publication such as ST.

FAHMIE ABDULLAH

The article ("K Box members feeling angry and insecure"; Sept 17) should not direct people to The Real Singapore website because people will visit the site to view the leaked information and download it. This means the leaked info will be further spread and cause more harm.  I think it is also unwise to say The Real Singapore is a socio-political website because I think it is just a tabloid website.

Our reasons:

The K-Box hackers provided the leaked information only to media outlets. All media outlets had the information but refused to publish it, bar The Real Singapore. There is a fine balance between privacy and public interest. That was why The Straits Times published a factual report citing the media exception and took pains to exclude the link. That was also why we advised the readers to seek an explanation directly from the keepers of the site that offered the leaked information.

K Box members feeling angry and insecure after hackers leak personal data