Fears for press freedom in Hong Kong are overblown – try publishing a Ming Pao-style blank column in a Rupert Murdoch paper
Media freedom means editors having free rein over what to publish, not staff dictating content to their bosses
Oh no, there it goes again – the death knell being sounded for Hong Kong’s media freedom. Time to mourn. But wait. Didn’t we hear that same sound in 2013 when the Executive Council refused to give Ricky Wong Wai-kay a television licence, in 2014 when Commercial Radio sacked Li Wei-ling, and when Ming Pao replaced chief editor Kevin Lau Chun-to? It’s back again with Ming Pao’s sacking of executive chief editor Keung Kwok-yuen. If media freedom is dying, it’s sure taking a long time.
Let’s recall what the media was doing while supposedly gasping for life. It gave blanket coverage to Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying’s alleged pocketing of HK$50 million from an Australian firm, exposed ex-ICAC chief Timothy Tong Hin-ming’s extravagant lifestyle, ran leaked recordings of University of Hong Kong governing council meetings, revealed Permanent Secretary for Home Affairs Betty Fung Ching Suk-yee’s alleged flat-swap wrongdoing, and exposed the so-called “baggage-gate” scandal involving Leung’s daughter.
How dead is media freedom when Ming Pao published blank columns from writers protesting against Keung’s sacking? Try doing that in a Rupert Murdoch paper. Tune in any weekday morning to Commercial Radio’s Chinese-language talk show. The three hosts take turns mocking Leung. One had fired Leung-basher Li but now makes a big deal of Ming Pao firing Keung. Ming Pao co-founder and novelist Louis Cha Leung-yung reportedly once said: “Press freedom of Ming Pao is the press freedom of the owner. Those who are not happy could set up another paper to pursue their own freedom.” The Guardian last year quoted former New York Times editorial board member David Firestone as saying: “I don’t know of any publisher who pays no attention to the editorial board on the papers they own.”
Public Eye doesn’t know if Ming Pao fired Keung to muzzle him or to cut costs. If it was to silence him he needs to say it out loud. But Ming Pao’s owners have every right to their own agenda. The same goes for Apple Daily’s Jimmy Lai Chee-ying and the state-owned Ta Kung Pao. Their money bankrolls their papers. If you don’t like their agenda, work for someone else. Those who fear media freedom is dying can find like-minded people with the means to start their own paper. Yes, some Hong Kong media self-censor, as happens everywhere. If you feel Ming Pao is self-censoring, don’t read it or work for it. But true media freedom means the freedom to decide what to publish. It sure as hell doesn’t mean staff can dictate to their bosses what media freedom is.
