Advertisement
Advertisement
X (formerly Twitter)
Get more with myNEWS
A personalised news feed of stories that matter to you
Learn more
Elon Musk’s Twitter profile is seen on a smartphone against the backdrop of Twitter logos. Musk struck a US$44 billion deal last week to buy the social media platform. Illustration: Reuters

Letters | Why Twitter should not ban China and Russia

  • Readers discuss the proposal to block the Twitter accounts of some countries, why Hong Kong’s chief executive candidate must adopt a child-centred approach, and what was lacking in his policy platform
Feel strongly about these letters, or any other aspects of the news? Share your views by emailing us your Letter to the Editor at [email protected] or filling in this Google form. Submissions should not exceed 400 words, and must include your full name and address, plus a phone number for verification.
In the context of whether countries the United States sees as its adversaries should be banned from Twitter, the author of “A Twitter censorship conundrum for Elon Musk, champion of free speech” (May 1) says certain states “seek to shut us all up” even as they churn out their propaganda.

Beijing may ban Twitter at home – although virtual private networks or VPNs are widely used – but it doesn’t use it at home either. It only uses Twitter to try to reach foreign audiences to tell its side of the story. After all, it has nothing comparable to Radio Free Asia or Radio Free Europe, which churns out US propaganda abroad. So Twitter helps level the playing field.

Unfortunately, Americans are conditioned by their government and media to believe that anything mainland China or Russia says is propaganda. I enjoyed watching Russia Today America before it shut down. I found the channel factual, although perhaps selective, in its reportage, but it’s the same with CNN or others.

If countries the US sees as adversaries are denied access to Twitter in the US, the US government will more easily spread lies and distortions such as the fictitious North Vietnamese attack in the Gulf of Tonkin or the non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. And who will counter the Biden administration’s Disinformation Governance Board? American autocracy is coming.

John Chiu, Chai Wan

How John Lee can do better by Hong Kong’s children

For Hong Kong’s chief executive candidate to stand tall, he must be forward-looking, people-centred and visionary.

Mr John Lee Ka-chiu’s campaign has placed significant focus on enhancing the city’s competitiveness, addressing housing and livelihood issues, and reforming governance and civil service procedures and culture.

However, to be relevant and truly proactive, he must be determined to start early.

For the sake of everyone who remains in Hong Kong and embraces it as our home, a “child perspective” would help sow the seeds of and rebuild a Hong Kong culture which respects and treasures each and every soul, in particular the young and vulnerable, right from the start, and which offers opportunities.

Hongkongers of all ages have numerous pressing needs. In seeking to address them, Mr Lee must consider two changes.

First, he must consider instituting a system that mandates a child impact assessment in every policy and significant deliberation that affects Hong Kong, whose stakeholders doubtlessly include children, our future. For example, in urban planning, smart city development and the reform of housing policy, the relevant bureaus should be required to conduct child impact assessments so children’s best interests are taken into account.

Similarly, if not more importantly, children must be prioritised in terms of policy, practice and resources allocation during times of crisis, such as the Covid-19 pandemic.

Second, a mandatory and independent child commissioner and a child commission, supported by resources and partnered with various stakeholders, especially children and their advocates, must put in place effective systems and good practices so as to truly make Hong Kong a jurisdiction that honours its commitments under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Priscilla Lui Tsang Sun-kai, member, Hong Kong Commission on Children

‘Old wine in old bottle’ won’t give young people hope

I can sum up Mr John Lee’s manifesto in one phrase: old wine in an old bottle. In other words, the chief executive hopeful is conducting an orchestra whose members are grey-haired. Yes, they have experience, but it is both an asset and a liability.

Mr Lee’s manifesto shows him to be an ardent follower of previous governments, with fine-tuning here and there. He is a loyal civil servant aiming at “result-oriented” initiatives.

A new government should give the people new hope, but I don’t believe people, particularly the young, will find any surprises in Mr Lee’s policy platform. Hopefully, we can break the curse of the “Peter principle”, which states that “every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence”.

Mr Lee is the sole candidate in the chief executive election. Even before his platform had been announced, Election Committee members expressed their wholehearted support. Maybe this fully shows a democratic election with Chinese characteristics. Let’s not forget this is the first chief executive election after the reform of our electoral system.

Mr Lee has made it crystal clear he will uphold the rule of law and that young people who took part in the social unrest will be punished accordingly. I believe it is time to heal broken hearts and dress open wounds. It is foolish to have a protracted struggle with the younger generation to whom tomorrow belongs.

If our young people feel they don’t have a future, the whole community has no future. We must not wait until the trend is irreversible, but act in the spirit of forgiveness to win the hearts of the young. In so doing, we can stop the tide of emigration and tap an immense reservoir of manpower to build a better tomorrow. The capital that has flowed out can be earned by other means but spilled water can’t be collected again.

The young people who can’t migrate to other countries constitute a strong opposition. We must find a way to untie Hong Kong’s Gordian knot and make full use of the potential of our young people so that our city will shine even brighter in 2047 and beyond.

Lo Wai Kong, Lai Chi Kok

3