February, 2007

PRESS FREEDOM
Self-Censorship Corrodes the Media and Society

Emily Lau Wai-hing

(The author of the second article in HKCI's series to commemorate the 10th anniversary of Hong Kong's handover in 2007 is a legislator of The Frontier political party and former journalist.)

In the summer of 2003, Hong Kong was in turmoil because the then-chief executive, Tung Chee-hwa, wanted to bulldoze the National Security Bill through the Legislative Council (Legco). Not surprisingly, such efforts were strongly resisted by many people in the community, particularly those in the mass media, because they feared such a law would undermine freedom of expression by making "a crime out of free speech."

The bill was an attempt to implement Article 23 of the Basic Law, the miniconstitution of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR). According to Article 23, the HKSAR shall enact laws on its own to prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition and subversion against the central government or the theft of state secrets, to prohibit foreign political organisations from conducting political activities in the HKSAR and to prohibit political organisations from establishing ties with foreign political organisations.

During the change of sovereignty in 1997, there was concern that freedoms would diminish and the rule of law could be undermined. Article 23 is one reason for these concerns, and it continues to hang over the heads of Hong Kong's people, threatening to take away their freedoms.

Ten years after the handover some of these worries are beginning to materialise. Under the long shadow of Beijing, an increasing number of Hong Kong people have chosen to practise self-censorship in order not to incur the wrath of Beijing. Many people dare not publicly criticise the HKSAR and central governments lest that might jeopardise their commercial and professional interests. Some even fear they might be victimised as Beijing has a habit of settling accounts with its critics.

As the summer of 2003 wore on, opposition to the National Security Bill mounted. People's power reached a climax on July 1 when more than 750,000 people marched in sweltering heat to denounce the bill. Several days later the senior government official who spearheaded the bill, Regina Ip Lau Suk-yee, resigned as did the unpopular financial secretary, Antony Leung.

The 2003 demonstration was unprecedented in Hong Kong's history as there has never been such a large march over a local issue, and it rocked Hong Kong to its foundation and showed people cherished their freedoms. However, the march also set alarm bells ringing in the mainland. Seeing such a tumultuous development, Beijing became concerned that events could spin out of control in the HKSAR.

Until the large march of July 1, 2003, Beijing was content to let Tung Chee-hwa govern. The demonstration was a watershed though. It marked President Hu Jintao's loss of confidence in Tung. In December 2004, Hu harshly criticised Tung, the handpicked lieutenant of Hu's predecessor President Jiang Zemin; and in March 2005, Tung resigned.

Before Tung stepped down, however, Hu decided to take control of the situation in the HKSAR. The first casualty was political reform as the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPC) announced in April 2004 that there would be no direct elections for the chief executive in 2007 and for the entire legislature in 2008.

The central government also concluded that the HKSAR news media should be held responsible for whipping up anti-government sentiment that thus produced the huge protest. Hence, the news media became the second casualty.

In the spring of 2004, two popular radio talk-show hosts, Albert Cheng and Wong Yuk-man, unexpectedly stopped broadcasting on Commercial Radio. Although their programmes were popular and helped the station reap huge advertising profits, they were taken off the air. Both men claimed they were under pressure to discontinue their radio broadcasts. Although the two talk-show hosts claimed their personal safety was at stake, the HKSAR government was unable to offer them any protection. The silencing of Cheng and Wong was the strongest indication yet that Commercial Radio was under the influence of an invisible hand.

In addition to Cheng and Wong, a third radio talk-show host also decided to quit. Allen Lee Peng-fei, a former member of the Executive and Legislative Councils and a delegate to the NPC, told a Legco Home Affairs Panel meeting on May 27, 2004, he decided to quit broadcasting because of a late-night call from a retired mainland official who made references to his wife and daughter.

The experience of the three men sent shock waves throughout the HKSAR. Many people believed they had received pressure from Beijing-related sources. The public also believed Commercial Radio had received similar pressure. Many Hong Kong people felt sad, disappointed and powerless. The episode was a devastating blow to freedom of expression and showed clearly who was in charge.

Apart from removing the radio talk-show hosts, the invisible hand was also at work muzzling Radio Television Hong Kong (RTHK), a government department that has been operating for many years as a public service broadcaster. Many pro-Beijing politicians cannot accept this role and have put pressure on RTHK to become a government mouthpiece, or at least to refrain from making programmes which are critical of the government. Despite relentless attacks, however, RTHK has consistently been regarded by the public, as well as people in the journalistic profession, as a news organisation with the highest credibility rating.

In January 2006, the government of Donald Tsang Yam-kuen, who replaced Tung as chief executive when the latter resigned in March 2005, appointed a panel to review public service broadcasting. The RTHK staff, however, are convinced they are the real target. After working for more than a year, the panel has yet to publish its report. RTHK staff members are worried because they fear their jobs could be at stake and that the station's editorial independence might be further undermined.

In addition to targeting the electronic media, the invisible hand also did not spare the print media. On the whole, the mass media engages much more in self-censorship and is tame, refraining from publishing articles which would give a negative image of Beijing. The press coverage given to pro-democracy politicians has also decreased.

Self-censorship by the news media has had a debilitating effect on society. University academics and professional people have become reluctant to publicly express their views. Only some pro-democracy politicians and non-government activists dare to criticise the HKSAR government. However, their views are seldom reported.

Moreover, hardly seen in the news media is criticism of the central government. This disturbing phenomenon is like an infectious disease. If more and more people choose to practise self-censorship, Hong Kong's freedom of expression may vanish, thereby putting all other freedoms at risk.

In April 2005, a shattering incident took place which made many journalists' blood turn cold. On April 22, respected journalist Ching Cheong, China correspondent for Singapore's Straits Times, was detained in Guangzhou. Four months later he was charged with spying for Taiwan in return for large sums of money. Ching maintained his innocence, however, and people in business and political circles, including pro-Beijing politicians, pleaded his case in Beijing. All attempts though have been in vain.

In August 2006, a court in Beijing jailed Ching for five years. He lodged an appeal, but it was rejected by the Beijing Higher People's Court in November. Ching's episode has had a chilling effect, not only on journalists, but also on people who conduct research on mainland matters. Beijing's iron-fist handling of Ching's case is a signal that if journalists dare to pry into sensitive areas they do so at their own peril.

In October 2006, Hong Kong's international press freedom ranking slipped to its lowest point in the past five years. According to the annual report by the Paris-based Reporters without Borders, the HKSAR, which ranked 39th in the world in 2005, fell to 58th-on par with Fiji, Poland and Romania. The result marks the lowest point Hong Kong has ever reached since Reporters without Borders began compiling the list in 2002. In that survey, Hong Kong led all of Asia, ranking 18th in the world.

In the past, few journalists would admit to practicing self-censorship because it implied the person concerned did not have the courage to resist the pressure. Recently, that began to change. The Journalism and Communication Dept. of Chinese University recently conducted a survey of local journalists in which the respondents were asked to give ratings on the credibility of local news organisations. The result, published in December 2006, revealed that, compared to a similar survey conducted five years ago, the ratings have declined. Of the 24 news organisations which the journalists were asked to assess, the ratings of 23 declined. The only one with a higher rating was the Chinese-language Apple Daily. In the electronic media, the news organisation which suffered the largest drop was Asia Television. In the print media, it was the Sing Tao Daily News. The academics who conducted the survey said the ratings were the lowest ever and that one reason was self-censorship.

In January 2007, the Hong Kong Journalists Association (HKJA) commissioned Lingnan University to conduct a survey among journalists and members of the public on press freedom in Hong Kong 10 years after the handover and obtained similar findings. The result, which was published on Feb. 10, 2007, showed that 58.4 percent of the journalist respondents think press freedom has deteriorated since the handover and that it is mainly due to self-censorship and the government's tighter grip on the flow of information.

Targeting specifically self-censorship, the survey found that 58.5 percent of the press think that the problem is more serious than 10 years ago because of the tendency to downplay negative news about the central government or news which the media suspects Beijing would regard as sensitive. Almost 40 percent of the journalist respondents said their colleagues, including supervisors, had practised self-censorship in the last 12 months, and an equally disturbing 30 percent of journalists in the survey admitted they themselves had practised self-censorship in the past 12 months.

During the current campaign for the so-called election of the chief executive, in which only 800 privileged people have the right to vote, the problem of self-censorship has been most obvious. Although there are two candidates, the certain winner is Donald Tsang because he has been anointed by Beijing. His challenger, Alan Leong Kah-kit of the Civic Party, has no chance of winning.

Thus, the "contest" has been lop-sided from the start. Acting as if they are part of Tsang's election machine, most of the news media has given extensive coverage to his election campaign. Views of people who boycott the small circle election because it is neither free nor fair are almost completely ignored, unless there is a noisy demonstration. The impression given by the media is that it is "an almost real election."

Furthermore, some news media allow themselves to be used as political tools. In order to boost Tsang's campaign, the media act in concert to present an image of a prosperous and stable society. Some news media bend over backwards to boost the feel-good factor, thereby giving credit to Tsang.

As the HKSAR enters its 10th anniversary, there are signs everywhere that the news media have come under political and commercial pressure due to the influence of Beijing. The morale of the news profession is consequently as low as journalists' wages.

An increasing number of reporters and editors choose to practise self-censorship as a form of survival-an alarming trend that does not bode well for the future. If the media remain silent, the voices of the people will not be heard.

For the time being, despite the adversity, Hong Kong is still the freest city in China. In order to safeguard Hong Kong's freedoms, the people need to be eternally vigilant. It is hoped our friends in the international community will cast a watchful eye over Hong Kong and monitor the state of its freedoms.