On the eve of the 1997 handover of Hong Kong, I published an article entitled Twelve questions about Hong Kong's press freedoms. It has now been more than six years since the handover. Looking back on those questions and considering the current situation, I can't help answering eight of the questions myself.
1. The people of Hong Kong were very concerned about freedom of the press before the handover. Hong Kong's economy has declined, making media operations difficult. This is a result of the 1997 Asian financial crisis, as well as the flawed policies of Tung Chee-hwa (
2. Both ownership changes and the media's tendency towards self-censorship are worrisome. But the media are often able to confront political interference with "market rationality" (the public's right to know). Considering that the HKSAR government is biased, that the Legislative and District Councils do not follow public opinion and that the democratic consultation mechanism is ineffective, people could rely only on the media to help them fight the legislation process of Article 23 of the Basic Law (基本法) and to uncover the SARS outbreak. Media can sometimes be noisy and unpleasant, but without them, Hong Kong might sink deeper.
3. Beijing has cooled down since the handover and seldom publicly criticizes Hong Kong's media. Still, the HKSAR government has supported left-wing newspapers and pro-China forces and has oppressed local radio and democratic forces. Hence, public opinion has gradually softened toward Beijing while it has become more critical of Tung.
4. The Chinese central government wanted the HKSAR government to enact the Article 23 legislation (the "subversion" law) by itself. Surprisingly, Tung and Secretary for Security Regina Ip (
5. I predicted in 1994 that Hong Kong's press freedoms would decline but that transparency would remain high. Today,owners of the major media conglomerates have massive business interests in China. The opinions of their media outlets often waver in the face of conflicts of interest. Discussion of either Taiwanese independence and the Falun Gong (
6. The Hong Kong media are no longer as crazy as they were before the handover. Whether the handover of Hong Kong was good or bad, the whole matter settled down after a while. In any case, the overall situation after the return has not been as bad as people had imagined it would be.
7. Some newspaper editorialists hesitate to speak openly but in general the content is diverse and open. What Hong Kong longs for is democratic politics and a prosperous economy, not stereotyped nationalism. The trend of publishing patriotic editorials has faded since the handover.
8. The quality of Hong Kong's journalists is not high but their professional spirit is outstanding. Without their effort, more SARS patients in Hong Kong and China might have died as their governments covered up the truth.
Lee Chin-chuan is chairman of the Department of English and Communication at City University of Hong Kong.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
China’s recent aggressive military posture around Taiwan simply reflects the truth that China is a millennium behind, as Kobe City Councilor Norihiro Uehata has commented. While democratic countries work for peace, prosperity and progress, authoritarian countries such as Russia and China only care about territorial expansion, superpower status and world dominance, while their people suffer. Two millennia ago, the ancient Chinese philosopher Mencius (孟子) would have advised Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) that “people are the most important, state is lesser, and the ruler is the least important.” In fact, the reverse order is causing the great depression in China right now,
We are used to hearing that whenever something happens, it means Taiwan is about to fall to China. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot change the color of his socks without China experts claiming it means an invasion is imminent. So, it is no surprise that what happened in Venezuela over the weekend triggered the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Taiwan is next. That is not an opinion on whether US President Donald Trump was right to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the way he did or if it is good for Venezuela and the world. There are other, more qualified
This should be the year in which the democracies, especially those in East Asia, lose their fear of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) “one China principle” plus its nuclear “Cognitive Warfare” coercion strategies, all designed to achieve hegemony without fighting. For 2025, stoking regional and global fear was a major goal for the CCP and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA), following on Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) Little Red Book admonition, “We must be ruthless to our enemies; we must overpower and annihilate them.” But on Dec. 17, 2025, the Trump Administration demonstrated direct defiance of CCP terror with its record US$11.1 billion arms
The immediate response in Taiwan to the extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by the US over the weekend was to say that it was an example of violence by a major power against a smaller nation and that, as such, it gave Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) carte blanche to invade Taiwan. That assessment is vastly oversimplistic and, on more sober reflection, likely incorrect. Generally speaking, there are three basic interpretations from commentators in Taiwan. The first is that the US is no longer interested in what is happening beyond its own backyard, and no longer preoccupied with regions in other
RSS