Channel
@jomontelegram
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
431subscribers
+17 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1003976470866 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @jomontelegram |
| Created | 21 May 2026 — measured — dated from the channel’s first post |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 8 October 2026 |
| Measurements held | 7 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 8 October 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/jomontelegram |
Other / unclassifiable — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 21 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 54% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 8 Oct 2026, 00:40 | 431 | +4 |
| 26 Sept 2026, 11:21 | 427 | +6 |
| 13 Sept 2026, 21:19 | 421 | +3 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 13:05 | 418 | +1 |
| 15 Aug 2026, 12:38 | 417 | +2 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 21:38 | 415 | +1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 00:48 | 414 | first reading |
17 posts held, back to 21 May 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 page of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 17 posts for this entry, the most recent from 4 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
89 reactions across 14 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 83.1% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 74 | 83.1% | |
| 💯 | 5 | 5.62% | |
| ❤🔥 | 3 | 3.37% | |
| 🤔 | 3 | 3.37% | |
| 🔥 | 2 | 2.25% | |
| 👍 | 1 | 1.12% | |
| 👾 | 1 | 1.12% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 14 of the 17 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 89 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 17 most recent posts we hold, published 21 May 2026 to 4 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
We all have them: objects that remind us of another person. Often they’re fabric. And many symbolise grief. Is that 2026’s emotion of the year, btw? In any case, Xingyun responded to last year’s print issue theme of materiality—movement and magic were the others—with this tender piece that will almost certainly touch every one of you. And Xingyun's generously agreed to be part of this convo! Continued in comments, d…
❤6
It might be Singaporeans’ favourite offence. This week 10 jaywalkers were fined S$50 each for crossing a four-lane road near Boon Keng MRT. But why exactly do we do it? And what does it say about the way humans interact with urban design? One of the many intriguing things for me in Serene’s column today is the distinction in behavioural instincts and mindsets between the elderly and the rest of us, when it comes to …
❤5
Jomfest 2026 With the release of our "red carpet" videos yesterday, we're done with the content from Jomfest 2026. Thanks so much to all who helped and participated. I'm gonna share one interesting idea to emerge from one attendee in the comments here, please share any of your thoughts too, help us make Jomfest 2027 even better. ICYMI Full panel videos from each of the four panels: Teo You Yenn's keynote around Un…
❤5❤🔥2
Hello everyone! I’m Saki, head of research and social media at Jom. Last week, I wrote about Meta Glasses in “Singapore This Week”: https://www.jom.media/singapore-this-week-100726/#society-surveillance-state-cam-girls Recently, I learnt about “panopticon chic”—the rise of creatives/artists/celebrities/influencers filming content using surveillance cameras. Think music videos seemingly shot on CCTV cameras or “outfi…
❤11
A few weeks ago, we published "Slow style, formal pleasure" by Jom's dapper history editor Faris Joraimi. The essay, which first appeared in our print issue last year, is both a sartorial bildungsroman and a fascinating journey tracing the changing contours of men's fashion in South-east Asia. https://www.jom.media/slow-style-formal-pleasure/
❤7
“Berahi: Holy Unions”, Plan B, and Jom Those of you who wanna get stuck into our usual essay of the week convo, please join it in the comments above. But there's a separate thingie I wanted to share, because this week Jom also had a special post of sorts (read: extra work for my colleagues), because on Thursday we decided that we had to lend our voice to the online debate about a contemporary dance company coming u…
❤6
That Royal Pop by Audemars Piguet and Swatch. Last week, Maria Oshige, our intern from NUS and perhaps our most junior writer, dealt with the concept of queueing and the lipstick effect from a cultural angle in her blurb. This week, Serene Koh, our Everyday Economics columnist and one of our most senior writers, interrogates it through her trademark behavioural lens. Here’s are some key paras: “The question of what…
❤2
Thanks Abhishek and Saki for sharing all those thoughts! This week, the team has decided to again post one of our blurbs from STW, on "CECA" Indians and the government's censorship of alleged racist/hate speech. I'll post the blurb below, and in the comments share some interesting things I've learned since, particularly in how we seem to have censored only Western but not Chinese platforms. Society: It’s the cockro…
❤5
So even as the government does the important work of censoring racist and hate speech, it must also engage in the more difficult job of fostering a more open, honest, collaborative public discourse about race and immigration. Otherwise, particularly in this AI-fuelled era, we’ll simply be engaged in an endless game of whack a mole—without understanding why they keep popping up in the first place.
💯3
Thanks @cinicism and Sudhir for sharing, and everyone else for reading. Our essay of the week is "Notes from a rental flat dweller" by Sakinah Safiee, Jom's head of social media and research. Saki combines memoir, ethnography, and sociology to create a portrait of Malay lives in Singapore's rental flats that’s as moving in its depictions as it is rigorous in its analyses. In doing so, she questions received wisdom a…
❤9🤔2❤🔥1
Thanks Aini, Cindy, Corrie and Serene for the great discussion about "Bill, please". I've also just added a poll in the comments to assess how peeps split the bill with their closest friends. This week, Jom has decided to start two conversations here. First, Pritam and the WP, whom I wrote about in "Singapore This Week", since it seems to be an important political topic. The second, possibly tomorrow, will be about …
❤3💯2
Raeesah, who floated into Parliament citing American activist Angela Davis and criticising policing, represents the party’s dalliance with what’s come to be known, often derogatorily, as wokeism. In the annals of the global anti-woke backlash that’s helped elevate Trump 2.0 and others, the convoluted struggles of one Singaporean politician will hardly register. Sebagai api dalam sekam, like fire smouldering in padi h…
❤1👍1
Showing the 12 most recent of 17 posts we hold for @jomontelegram. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Named by 1 registered channel — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 8 October 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Jom on Tele” (@jomontelegram), 431 subscribers as measured 8 October 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/jomontelegram.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.