I have not written to malaysiakini for quite some time, but I feel compelled to respond to Paul Warren's letter on Kit Siang's position in DAP and his 'popularity' in the media ('Kit Siang - man of all seasons', July 26).

I do not deny that Kit Siang has done a great deal as an opposition leader. Indeed, I do not agree, as some suggest, that his mere exit from DAP's seat of power will automatically reverse the fortunes of the declining party. In any case, I do not propose to enter into the debate whether Kit Siang should or should not go.

However, the simplistic argument that Kit Siang soundly and intelligently vocalises pertinent issues and therefore he gets published, reflects the ignorance and naivety of the letter writer regarding the dynamics and politics of the mainstream media in this country.

First of all, journalists and editors, just like most ordinary Malaysians, are also caught in the snare of personality politics. If you don't hold an important post, your opinion is not worth publishing. So, the higher up one is on the hierarchy, the greater publicity one gets.

Indeed, this is a vicious circle. The more publicity one gets, the more people think one is great. And thus, the likelier it is that one is re-elected as the leader of the party, no matter how bland or stale one's rhetoric and politics have become.

Secondly, it is completely absurd and unthinkable to assume that the media are not influenced by factors other than the merits of what is said when deciding to quote or publish a particular person's views.

For a start, we all know how controlled the mainstream media is. Obviously, added publicity would not be given to someone who could seriously challenge the government. Hence, there are many intelligent politicians who are hardly quoted or published in the media, unless what they say serves the interest of the government.

And to skew the picture even more, there is the consideration of how sensational or saleable a particular person's views are. Thus, even if the most brilliant words were uttered by an as-yet-unknown political genius, the fact that he is an unknown (and not saleable) relegates his opinion to the 'reject' tray.

Moreover, if it is true that intelligence is the sole criterion for publication, then we should see a lot more coverage given to the brilliant minds of this country; e.g., people like Prof Jomo KS and the late Dr Ishak Shari (God bless his soul).

The fact of the matter is that Lim Kit Siang churns out, almost religiously, statements on a daily basis. At times, it could be even more often, depending on the topic at hand.

Yes, credit must be given for his diligence. However, two points should be noted here: One, not all opposition politicians have his luxury of doing this on a full-time basis, either because of financial or other constraints.

Two, and more importantly, we should not simply attribute his greater publication rate to his presumed superior intelligence and/or charisma. The fact that he is given more print space could very well mean what he says could be used by the powers that be for their own insidious devices.

Simply because some people look larger than life doesn't mean that they are great. It could mean a whole host of things, including that they or what they say can be used for the benefit of certain interested parties.

It is nave to think that there are no vested interests in the media industry, including the alternative one in this country.