An article that appeared on the ChannelNewsAsia website reported that 56 per cent of Singaporeans are willing to travel an hour or more to their favourite eateries, according to a study by a group of students from Meridian Junior College.
However I'm highly sceptical about the accuracy of this study because one of the paragraphs writes: 'The students asked more than 100 Singaporeans a list of food-related trivia questions.'
Maybe this could be a case of bad journalism, but seriously, does 'more than 100 Singaporeans' tell you anything about the sample size and hence accuracy of the study? I hate it when I read such phrases in news articles, i.e. more/less than x number. It hardly stands for accuracy which is something of utmost importance in journalism.
So what's 'more than 100 Singaporeans' supposed to mean? 101 people? 200? 1000? 10,000? Someone please enlighten me. I think such writing is sloppy. I would rather the word 'about' be used. At least it gives readers a more approximate idea of the numbers we're looking at.
With that scepticism already in place, I go on to read that 'the study also found that the eastern part of Singapore is a food-lover's paradise, with the highest concentration of acclaimed eateries in East Coast, Changi Village, Bedok and Geylang.'
Hmm...does anyone out there want to beg to differ? I wouldn't call myself a Miss Know-It-All when it comes to food in Singapore, so I'd really like to know what these 'acclaimed eateries' are and what critiera must it have to become 'acclaimed'?
Anyway, if the study is to be believed, I'm not in the 56 per cent 'cos I'm too lazy. Having to spend that amount of time to get somewhere in a small place like Singapore just means it requires too much effort. And if I did do it, that food had better be damn good!