With pro-Beijing media setting Hong Kong’s red lines, Carrie Lam’s policy address offers little hope

The chief executive has said the blue cover of her policy address represents hope and that the national security law will not curb freedoms in Hong Kong. However, a manufacturer’s decision to suspend its business after pro-Beijing media accused it of violating the new law indicates it is having a chilling effect

Michael Chugani

Published: 7:30am, 26 Nov, 2020

Why you can trust SCMP

So now we know. Think twice before you exercise free speech as defined by law and international conventions. Media acting as Beijing’s mouthpiece have their own definition of free speech. Cross their red line and you’re done for.

Mask manufacturer Yellow Factory found out the hard way last week. Pro-Beijing media accused it of violating the national security law by inciting hatred, violence and prolonging resistance by young people.

What exactly did Yellow Factory do to trigger such an attack – I call it “white terror” – by the loyalist media? Its masks had the acronym FDNOL, which they said could mean “ five demands, not one less”. I examined the national security law. Nowhere does it say FDNOL violates it. Neither does it specifically say the slogan “five demands, not one less” is a crime, although the authorities have warned it could violate the law.

Hongkongers must now view the word “could” in a new light. Whatever you do “could” violate the security law. Pro-Beijing media said Yellow Factory’s logo resembled a protester wearing a yellow helmet and goggles.

Also, its mask packaging had the slogan “Get well Hong Kong; fight the virus of our times”, which they said resembled the anti-government slogan “Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our times”. The word “resemble” must also be viewed in a new light. You “could” be a security threat if you have a harmless logo that “resembles” a threat.

09:09

National Security Law: The impact on Hong Kong’s activists

I wonder if I “could” be violating the law if I said I take my yellow helmet off to Yellow Factory for its innovative ideas to promote its business. I don’t have a yellow helmet but rather a black safety helmet, which I used as a journalist during last year’s protests, that “resembles” it.

After the mouthpiece media’s onslaught, I thought our new national security police would raid Yellow Factory, make mass arrests and confiscate FDNOL face masks as proof in court that the masks could topple the Communist Party.

Instead, Yellow Factory suspended its business to protect its staff, saying it did not want to violate the security law and will adjust its business. To me, that proves national security law critics’ claims of a chilling effect. What if a shop that sells yellow helmets and safety goggles to construction workers has a sign showing a worker wearing them? Could that be violating the law too?

Two days ago, I saw an elderly man carrying his grandson in the lift of the building where I live. The man wore a black T-shirt that said “freedom”. Could that violate the security law? What if I wore a face mask with an American flag or used the US national anthem as my ringtone? Would I be violating the law if my phone rang while riding the MTR?

03:03

Hong Kong publishers resort to self-censorship under new security law

Such questions would sound silly before, but you never know nowadays with pro-Beijing media acting as Red Guards. If a manufacturer can be terrorised into suspending its business because of FDNOL on face masks, anything can happen.

Our leader, Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, insists the security law has not eroded our freedoms. Now is the time for her to prove it by telling Beijing’s mouthpiece media they don’t define free speech.

Don’t hold your breath. Suffocating for free speech is worth it. Suffocating for Lam is not. She insisted two days ago Beijing didn’t dictate her policy speech. Take that with a grain of salt.

Many Hongkongers now see Lam as Beijing’s envoy to Hong Kong rather than a leader who fights for them. Lam told the media the blue cover of her policy speech represented hope. People buy hope only when it comes from a person who has earned their respect.

Barack Obama won the US presidency with that word. Hope is when leaders listen to the people, not only to their authoritarian masters.

Lam’s policy speech was long on praise for Beijing but offered little hope regarding political reforms for the estimated 2 million Hongkongers who marched peacefully last year to preserve the city’s core values.

Michael Chugani is a Hong Kong journalist and TV show host

Post