Public Eye

Two radio hosts fired; two very different reactions

PUBLISHED : Wednesday, 20 August, 2014, 3:28am
UPDATED : Wednesday, 20 August, 2014, 3:28am

Two radio hosts fired; two very different reactions

Remember how all hell broke loose in February when Commercial Radio sacked Li Wei-ling, who regularly used her prime-time talk show to savage the Leung Chun-ying administration? Self-proclaimed gladiators of free speech - from former chief secretary Anson Chan Fang On-sang to talk show host "Taipan" Albert Cheng King-hon - condemned the firing as a muzzling of the media without offering any proof. Pan-democratic lawmakers demanded a Legislative Council investigation. Li claimed, also without proof, that Leung had orchestrated her sacking. The Journalists Association called on Leung and Commercial Radio to prove she was not fired for political reasons. Well, another radio host, Ng Ka-lim, was sacked on Sunday night, hours after the big anti-Occupy Central march. He worked as a freelance DJ for internet radio station D100. Do you know who owns D100? Albert Cheng, the self-proclaimed defender of free speech. Do you know why Cheng fired Ng? For political reasons. D100 told Ng his political stand clashed with the station's because he was the MC at the march. But doesn't free speech allow you to have your own political stand? Only if you are Li Wei-ling, not if you are Ng Ka-lim. The funny thing is that Ng does not even take a political stand on air. He hosts a classical music show. What is even funnier is that Commercial Radio denied Li was sacked for political reasons, but Cheng actually admitted Ng was sacked for political reasons. Will the great defender of democracy Anson Chan condemn Ng's sacking as she did Li's? Ha! Will the Journalists Association, which speaks without fear of favour, come to Ng's defence as forcefully as it did Li's? Ha! Ha! Will the pan-democrats - or pan-hypocrites - demand a Legco inquiry? Hah! Hah! Hah!


Blatant double standards by city's 'pan-hypocrites'

Public Eye has to admit we are totally stumped. When mainlanders come here to join the annual July 1 march, pan-democrats hail it as fantastic that even mainlanders care about Hong Kong's democracy push. When mainlanders take part in the annual June 4 candlelight vigil, the pan-democrats praise them for caring about victims of the Tiananmen crackdown. But when mainlanders joined the anti-Occupy march on Sunday, the pan-democrats condemned that as interfering in our local affairs. Is it because the pan-democrats are pan-hypocrites?


Overpaid lawmakers have forgotten their duty

Our legislators are paid HK$87,450 a month, with a HK$16,000 allowance for entertainment and travelling, and many collect every cent. In return, they throw bananas at officials, march for democracy or butter up Beijing. They are blind to constant warnings by experts who, alarmed by rotting trees, say a tree law is urgently needed. They prefer squabbling over why Li Wei-ling was fired and why broadcasting investor Ricky Wong Wai-kay was refused a television licence. Last week, a pregnant woman died after a 10-metre tall tree fell on her in Mid-Levels. While the baby was delivered by caesarean section, alive but in critical condition, would his mother Zhang Qin, 37, be alive today if legislators had focused instead on pressing for a tree law? Her death should be on the conscience of all these overpaid clowns.


Michael Chugani is a columnist and television show host.