Normally at this time of year, Hong Kong media would have been bustling to prepare coverage of yesterday’s anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Massacre that, before COVID-19 restrictions hit, usually included a huge vigil in Victoria Park. The event is illegal in China, but had been proudly held in Hong Kong for decades.
This year, journalists at the respected public broadcaster Radio Television Hong Kong (RTHK) said they had been told to stand down.
“We were informed that no political story is allowed,” said Emily, an RTHK employee who, along with others interviewed for this article (Ann and Andy, mentioned later), asked that their real names not be used in order to speak freely. “We think it’s kind of funny, because what isn’t a political story now?”
After mass democracy protests in 2019, the Hong Kong government’s worsening crackdown on dissent over the past two years has also targeted press freedom. Once ranked 18th in the World Press Freedom Index, Hong Kong now sits at 80th.
RTHK is bearing the brunt, and many in the industry fear those in power intend to turn it into a propaganda department. Hong Kong Journalists Association chairperson Chris Yeung (楊健興) said the patience the government and pro-establishment camp once had for RTHK’s editorial freedom has run out.
“They can no longer tolerate a government department giving critical and at times embarrassing coverage in their editorial content,” Yeung said, adding that the government wants to “rectify” the broadcaster.
Its fate is a warning to the rest of the industry, Emily said. “If RTHK becomes propaganda, it’s also the death of Hong Kong media.”
JOURNALISM HINDERED
Established in 1928, RTHK is an award-winning public broadcaster, but over recent months it has been accused of bias, being too independent and taking the side of democracy protesters instead of upholding charter obligations to promote “one country two systems.”
RTHK has been criticized by officials and attacked in Chinese state media. Journalists have been suspended, doxed and harassed into resignation over their questioning. A producer was prosecuted for conducting journalistic research, and new rules announced last week require all non-civil service government employees, including RTHK staff, to pledge allegiance to the government.
After a highly critical government review found RTHK to have deficiencies in editorial management and accountability in February, then-director Leung Ka-wing (梁家榮) left before the end of his contract, farewelled without thanks. A least five other senior staff have also resigned.
Leung was replaced by former Hong Kong deputy secretary for home affairs Patrick Li (李百全), a career bureaucrat with no journalism experience who told legislators he intends to be hands-on with the broadcaster, with plans for programs promoting government policies and collaborations with media in China.
One of Li’s first acts was to establish vetting and approval processes for all story pitches, including proposed interviewees, which is why the Tiananmen coverage was rejected, Emily said.
Another RTHK employee, Ann, said the system is “destructive” to the editorial team.
“We don’t know what to do or what story can be aired,” Ann said. “There is no room for proper journalism.”
Based on the panel’s guidelines, RTHK has cut back or canceled at least 10 programs — including an already-aired segment about the Tiananmen anniversary last week — and deleted entire online archives.
The newly available airtime is being filled by Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam (林鄭月娥) in a daily program reportedly discussing the government’s overhaul of the electoral system.
“The charter states that RTHK is editorially independent. It does not say that an individual program production unit is editorially independent,” Li told the Hong Kong Legislative Council (LegCo) in March.
The changes, which Emily describes as an “earthquake,” appear concentrated in RTHK’s public affairs division, home to more historically “rebellious” programs, such as the canceled satirical show Headliner and the current affairs program Hong Kong Connection.
In a statement, RTHK’s management said one episode each of Hong Kong Connection, Hong Kong Stories and LegCo Review “were not impartial, unbiased and accurate,” and were canceled because they had been made before the vetting system was in place, and “could not be rectified before production.”
Hong Kong Connection has won multiple awards this year, including for an episode investigating police involvement in the notorious Yuen Long subway attacks.
The morning after the show won one of the awards, a producer, Bao Choy (蔡玉玲), was convicted and fined for accessing a publicly available database as part of her investigative work for the episode.
MEDIA CRISIS
The pervasive assumption is that Apple Daily, a pro-democracy tabloid owned by jailed media tycoon and government critic Jimmy Lai (黎智英), is next in line to be silenced.
Apple Daily editor-in-chief Ryan Law (羅燦) told Agence France-Presse that he was facing “the greatest crisis since I took up the post over three years ago.”
In addition to the prosecution of Lai, freezing of his assets and raids on the newsroom, Hong Kong’s police commissioner has accused Apple Daily of creating hatred and dividing society, while pro-Beijing media have called for it to be shut down.
“There have been rumors we might be shut down before July, some say maybe before the election in September or the end of the year. We simply don’t know what to believe,” said Andy, an Apple Daily employee.
Lai wrote to his staff from prison, telling them to stay strong but to also take care; journalism is now a far more dangerous job, he said.
“It definitely affects the morale here,” Andy said. “Not many of us have a personal relationship with Mr. Lai, but we all know he’s the icon of Apple Daily.”
Government powers over the media are increasing, with the Beijing-imposed National Security Law imposed last year, and a vaguely worded proposed law against “fake news,” which critics say the government and police will be allowed to define.
“I think we’re at the early stage of their move to so-called correct the media scene,” Andy said. “Also, Carrie Lam has promised to improve the media system. That implies there are other things in, say, regulating the media.”
Lam and her government maintain that they respect press freedom and that Hong Kong’s press will not be targeted if they do not break the law, but the lack of clearly defined offenses in the National Security Law, and police raids on Apple Daily and Stand News have created a well-documented chilling effect.
“Beijing and the Hong Kong government hold all the cards,” Andy said. “They have the legal means, the financial resources, to take over the scene of media. Those they can control, they control; those they can’t control, they use brute force or put fear into.”
In response to questions, RTHK denied there was a ban on Tiananmen anniversary coverage, and said there was no intention to have the broadcaster do the same work as the government information office, adding that all editorial decisions were in the hands of the broadcaster’s director.
“According to the charter, RTHK is editorially independent and is immune from commercial, political and/or other influences. The producers’ guidelines stipulate that ‘there can never be editorial autonomy without responsibility, freedom without restraint,’” a spokesperson said.
A government spokesperson did not answer questions about how “fake news” would be defined, instead saying that any law enforcement is based on evidence and according to the law, with no relation to someone’s political stance, background or occupation.
“It would be contrary to the rule of law to suggest that people or entities of certain sectors or professions could be above the law,” the spokesperson said.
For Emily, her eyes were on this week. On Thursday last week, the government banned the vigil for the second year, ostensibly because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
“I think June 4 is the point where we’ll see the death of the media,” she said. “If no one can go to the memorial, or if those who report will be arrested or punished, then we’ll understand the freedom is gone.”
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
At the same time as more than 30 military aircraft were detected near Taiwan — one of the highest daily incursions this year — with some flying as close as 37 nautical miles (69kms) from the northern city of Keelung, China announced a limited and selected relaxation of restrictions on Taiwanese agricultural exports and tourism, upon receiving a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) delegation led by KMT legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅崑萁). This demonstrates the two-faced gimmick of China’s “united front” strategy. Despite the strongest earthquake to hit the nation in 25 years striking Hualien on April 3, which caused
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past