It's a shame that just because Daniel Russell did not agree with the Cyberjaya article by Shuf Shukur, he thought malaysiakini should not have run it ([#1]Spike gossipy stuff and be more selective[/#], March 19). His confusing reasoning suggests he really opposes the writer's view of the Multimedia Super Corridor but wants to hide it in the name of a more serious journalism that he has in mind.

On the one hand, he opposes the article for being gossipy. Gossipy? If so, it means he found information in the article inaccurate or not credible. But, then, nowhere did he challenge the facts or data the writer presented.

On the other hand, Russell thinks that Shuf has a hidden agenda. But then, he also admitted that Shuf wrote an opinion piece. Hello? Does that not mean Shuf would take a position on what is happening to the development of the MSC?

Indeed, Shuf's 'agenda' is hardly hidden at all. It could be easily seen that he clearly has some problems with the way the MSC has been shaping up thus far.

And if Russell thinks that Malaysians critical of the MSC are all part of the political opposition, he must have a very dim view of them. Imagine saying all Americans critical of former US President Bill Clinton's questionable pardons that he issued are all Republicans!

True, Shuf should have mentioned how the Asian economic crisis might have hampered the progress of MSC. But other than just mentioning that, Russell offers nothing to counter Shuf's data or facts.

Russell argues that the MSC, like Nasa in the US, will have positive spin-offs in the future. OK, but then he seems to have missed Shuf's impression that he is sceptical especially when only the big corporations and well-heeled and well-connected Malaysians will end up able to benefit from it all (eg., how the train-cum-bus ride servicing KL-Putrajaya may offer expensive fares). Heard of the digital divide?

It's obvious Russell really has a problem with Shuf's view of the MSC, but he seems to want to hide it by attempting to denigrate Shuf's piece as "gossipy". Well, he has every right to a different view, but does that mean malaysiakini should have nixed Shuf's piece and not run such pieces in the future?

Personally, I found Shuf attempting a more engaging approach with a first-hand personal account. As such, he tried to pitch his article at the general reader, instead of a more specialised approach riddled with economic and/or technological jargons.

Surely, there must be room for Shuf's kind of writing, too, in malaysiakini, which is an electronic daily and not a specialised publication.