Singapore sling-shot?
Tung Chee Wa, Chief Executive --
Radio Television Hong Kong 
From tiny acorns, so mighty oaks do grow. Well, that's the saying, anyway. What happened here in Hong Kong and Beijing this week could be described as a bit of an acorn - and unless someone yanks the sucker up by its hardly formed roots, we could one day see a mighty oak in its place.
Maybe.
I am, for those of you preoccupied with the ups and downs of the President's zipper, referring to the storm of controversy that broke over remarks made by a Hong Kong publisher about the integrity of local broadcaster, Radio Television Hong Kong (RTHK). The aged magazine magnate and long time member of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Committee (CPPCC), Mr Xu Simin, reckons that RTHK is too critical of China, our dear Chief Executive Tung Chee Hwa, and that it doesn't support the policies of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) government.
And why should they? Well, according to Xu, since RTHK is a public broadcaster 'funded' by the government, they should toe the bloody line - just like that alleged news agency, Xinhua. Er, 'scuse me, but who is it that gives the government the money to pay RTHK? Joe Public, that's who. Xu failed to grasp the basic fundamental: Public Radio is there to serve the public - not government burocrats and politicians.
Not only did Xu miss this basic truth, like any good critic he based his remarks on second-hand information. I remember a Bangkok television critic who once panned a news/chat-show I anchored on cable television a few years ago. He got my co-anchor's name (and sex - or do we say gender?) wrong (actually, we'd never had the person on the show), he also got much of the content, time and even the channel wrong.
In the same vein, Xu admitted that he rarely, if ever, watched or listened to RTHK productions. Way to go, Xu. I bet he'd really be miffed if I wrote a long and critical appraisal of his magazine. Especially since I have never read it. And if I got the name wrong.
However, I have to agree with Xu on one thing. He said RTHK was a legacy, a hold-over from colonial days. That's true enough - they haven't changed a bit. They still offer (at least what they believe to be) comprehensive, unbiased and objective reports, they allow the public to air their views, and they remain fiercely independent. Trust the damn British to put up with and even encourage such a thing, eh?
Typical, just bloody typical.
The incident, especially since Xu decided to air his views at the CPPCC meeting in Beijing on the eve of the National People's Congress, has raised fears of Hong Kong's status as a self-governing Special Administrative Region. Freedom of the press activists and some of our more liberal legislators are accusing Xu of trying to involve Beijing's Central Government in Hong Kong's domestic affairs. They say Xu was way, way out of line.
To summarise, Hong Kong is indeed part of China, but with the 'one-country-two-systems' arrangement, Hong Kong is largely responsible for its own affairs except defense. This includes whatever regulations may be required pertaining to the operation and behaviour of the media - including public radio/television. This is enshrined in an agreement reached between London and Beijing known as the Basic Law.
But whatever the Basic Law says, people are worried that this may be the first salvo in a press freedom war. Well, perhaps salvo is a bit strong. Sling-shot, maybe? But when the stone hit the stout walls of RTHK, boy did the noise resonate through the territory! But for how long? Some members of the Democratic Party and other pro-Hong Kong groups (it would be incorrect to describe them as anti-Beijing) believe that the SAR's freedoms are slowly being chipped away. Little by little.
I personally can't say that I have noticed too much change. I feel as editorially free at my current radio station as I did when I worked for one of our rivals several years ago. But then, I have been accused of insensitivity from time to time. I am pretty much an "if it bleeds - it leads" sort of radio editor/anchor. Maybe I have missed the subtle changes.
Who knows? One day I might wake up in a Hong Kong with Singaporean characteristics. It is said our C.E. is a great admirer of Lee Kwan Yew and his disciplined little island. And Tung didn't exactly come out and put Xu in his place, in fact - at least to some observers - he 'sympathised' somewhat with Xu's off the wall views.
For the bottom line, a real kicker. Way back in 1989 when Tiananmen Square was campsite for thousands of students, there was a banner on display that read: "We should invite Xu Simin from Hong Kong to run China's first people's-run, non-governmental newspaper."
Yep, Xu was once considered something of a reformer. What happened, I wonder?
Search American Politics Provided by Hot Bot |
