PROMOTIONAL CAMPAIGNS are ubiquitous in Hong Kong. The brains behind them enjoy a high degree of latitude when it comes to their choice of words for public consumption. These wordsmiths are virtually at liberty to mislead their audience.
A mobile phone operator used to provide a recorded message in English and Cantonese on its automated mailbox service. It has recently asked its subscribers to choose either language in a move apparently aimed at reducing time and costs. Yet the company was thick-skinned enough to present the change as a move to 'upgrade' its service.
Another telecom group has been asking its tele-marketing team not to refer to the calls they make as a sales pitch but rather tell the customer they are conducting a survey into how subscribers view the firm's standard of service.
Yet, no such questions are asked - the ensuing dialogue centres on why the consumer should sign up for more of the company's 'value-added' services.
Government officials too seem to have become more conscientious about their verbal presentation. When the colonial government lifted its ban on homosexual acts between consenting adults in private, officials refrained from saying they wanted to 'legalise' homosexuality. Instead, they referred to the legislative initiative as a move to 'decriminalise' homosexual behaviour.
The idea was to avoid creating an impression that the Government endorsed homosexuality, lest it would irritate those who took a more conservative stance. Officials were at pains to draw a line between affirming homosexual acts and merely accommodating them as times change.
It is hard to determine whether, or how much, the alternative label contributed to the subsequent passage of the amendment. But the lesson was somehow lost when the SAR Government attempted to decriminalise football gambling.