Why RTHK should follow editorial line set by Hong Kong government

With reference to your editorial on May 25 (“Re-examine RTHK’s dual role in highly politicised climate”), I wish to point out that RTHK staff are a very privileged lot indeed. They enjoy editorial independence as journalists, as well as security of tenure afforded by their civil servant status, but they are strangely immune from the constraints and obligations applicable to all other journalists and government departments.

I say this because, in any media organisation around the world, “editorial independence” is not an unqualified privilege. Media organisations have their own character-defining stance and political leanings, and these are decided by the publisher or owner, not the editor.

Any editor or journalist who cannot live with this red line would simply be told to find another job. Things like this happen all the time in the world of journalism, and no one can accuse the publisher of “exerting pressure” or censorship.

RTHK’s mandate is to be neutral, not court controversy

If RTHK considers itself a professional media organisation, why should its journalists and editors be exempted from the rule of their own profession?

Unlike their counterparts in the commercial sector, they need have no regard for their “owner” – the Hong Kong government, because they know how difficult it is for the government to dismiss them, both technically and politically.

Some years ago, to express their dislike for a newly appointed director of broadcasting, some RTHK staff even staged a demonstration when he arrived at the office on his first day of work. Such behaviour would be subject to immediate censure and disciplinary action in any other government department.

Some may argue that the real “owner” of RTHK are the taxpayers, not the government. I beg to differ. It is the government that has the basic responsibility of protecting freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

However, with so many anti-government media organisations around in Hong Kong today, freedom of the press is alive and well, and the government has no obligation to spend public funds to run another one to demonstrate it values free speech.

If the viewership of RTHK’s productions, such as the controversial programme Headliner, is as high as it claims, then it makes sense for the government to let any interested commercial broadcaster bid for the copyright to produce them on their own. No one could then fault the government for censoring a sensitive programme, and RTHK would be able to focus on programmes which have a high social value but are not commercially viable, such as programmes on the arts, education and minority interests.

Raymond Young, CEO, Chinese Manufacturers’ Association of Hong Kong