Protesters display placards during a rally to support press freedom in Hong Kong on March 2, 2014.
Keeping quiet
Under
Hong Kong's de facto constitution, the Basic Law, residents are
guaranteed "freedom of speech, of the press and of publication," rights
that are not granted, or protected in mainland China.
While
this means there is little top-down control of media in Hong Kong,
self-censorship within the local press has been widely reported, both by
front-line reporters and editors who have left publications they felt
were unwilling to stand up to the government or corporate pressure.
One
of the best descriptions of self-censorship, and its pernicious power
which sometimes outstrips that of more aggressive control, comes from China scholar Perry Link.
"(The)
government's censorial authority in recent times has resembled not so
much a man-eating tiger or fire-snorting dragon as a giant anaconda
coiled in an overhead chandelier," Link wrote about academic
self-censorship in China.
"Normally
the great snake doesn't move. It doesn't have to. It feels no need to
be clear about its prohibitions. Its constant silent message is 'You
yourself decide,' after which, more often than not, everyone in its
shadow makes his or her large and small adjustments -- all quite
'naturally'."
While mainland China
has a massive formal censorship apparatus, controlling all aspects of
society from movies and music, to the Internet and book publishing, much
of what affects people on a day to day level is closer to
self-censorship.
Social media
firms, for example, employ hundreds of censors to police what their
users say, but for the most part, they do so without guidance or
direction from the central government, second guessing what their
bosses, and by extension the Communist Party's official censors will
disapprove of.
In this context,
self-censorship becomes more effective the more unclear the boundaries,
and the greater the repercussions for potentially stepping across them.
This
could be seen in Hong Kong in the wake of the attack on Lau, as the
chance of a violent response to a story suddenly seemed a real
possibility to many reporters, compounding existing fears about the
"wrong" story costing the journalist their job or resulting in costly
legal proceedings.
For over a
decade, however, even as warnings grew about self-censorship by Hong
Kong reporters, and media ownership was consolidated by a few
China-friendly businesspeople, the foreign press has largely operated
unfettered, a stark contrast to China, where international reporters
regularly harassed, ejected from the country, and their local colleagues
arrested and jailed.
That all changed this year.
Action reaction
The
Foreign Correspondents' Club of Hong Kong is positioned half way up a
hill on a busy, windy road with narrow pavements and multiple lanes in
the city's Central district.
It's
not a good venue to protest outside of, and yet, in August several dozen
people squeezed themselves into police cordoned-off areas opposite and
next to the club, bearing banners accusing the elite institution of
being involved in a "conspiracy to split Hong Kong from China."
Inside, the focus of the protests, Andy Chan, sat looking calm and composed as he prepared to give a speech arguing for the city's independence.
He chatted casually with FCC staff, and laughed when fire department
officials rushed into the building carrying axes in response to an
apparent hoax call.
Within days of
the event taking place, Chan's Hong Kong National Party was officially
banned under public security laws, the first time they had ever been
used to go after a political organization. The FCC itself, meanwhile,
was facing a storm of publicity amid calls for it to lose the lease to
its property and potentially even its license to operate.
By
October, those fears appeared misguided, until Victor Mallet, an editor
at the Financial Times who had hosted Chan in his capacity as
acting-FCC President, put in for a routine visa renewal.
Compared
to China and many other countries in the region (including ones which
boast about being democracies), Hong Kong is an incredibly easy place to
get a journalist visa, but Mallet had his refused, an almost unprecedented move the government has yet to explain but nearly everyone else has connected to the Chan talk.
While
the local government has consistently denied that Mallet's ejection was
anything to do with press freedom, the failure to provide an alternate
explanation, as well as the facts of the case, have left most to draw
their own conclusions.
"We ... are
deeply concerned that with this action, taken with no stated or
apparent legal basis, Hong Kong's special place as a bastion of free
expression and a free press has been eroded," 17 former presidents of
the FCC wrote in an open letter to Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam after
Mallet was denied entry to the city as a visitor on November 8.
New normal
While
reporters working in mainland China are obviously subject to the
pressures and concerns that can lead to self-censorship -- fear of
violence, fear of being ejected from the country or even jailed -- there
is an additional factor in Hong Kong, in that the city has long been a
place where many expats, including foreign reporters, are more like
immigrants, getting permanent residency and raising their children,
rather than moving on after a few years.
Being
ejected from a country one never had any intention of living in can,
though most journalists would not admit it, be a boon to career
prospects, significantly building the reporter's profile and reputation.
But being forced to leave somewhere you intended to raise your family
and settle down can be devastating, and questions naturally arise over
whether any given story, or event, or interview, is worth that?
Recent weeks have seen two incidents which appear from the outside to be clear cut cases of self-censorship.
The specter of the attack on Lau, as well as the 2015 disappearance of several Hong Kong booksellers, was raised on November 2, when the organizers of a show by Chinese dissident artist Badiucao canceled the event, a day before it was due to take place, alleging "threats made by the Chinese authorities relating to the artist."
This
was followed by the cancellation of a talk by another Chinese exile,
novelist Ma Jian, at Tai Kwun, an art space which has received
government funding, as part of a series of events connected to the Hong
Kong International Literary Festival.
In
a statement, the Director of Tai Kwun, Timothy Calnin, said organizers
"do not want Tai Kwun to become a platform to promote the political
interests of any individual."
"The
cancellation appears to be at the very least an act of self-censorship,
which would add to a growing list of incidents of suppression of free
expression in Hong Kong," said Jason Y. Ng, president of PEN Hong Kong, a
pro-free speech organization.
"It
is all the more jarring that the decision was made by a publicly funded
venue that claims to celebrate and support the arts and creativity,"
added Ng.
The
self-censorship charge appeared to be confirmed when Tai Kwun abruptly
reversed its decision and agreed to host Ma after all.
"Ma
has made public statements which clarify that his appearances in Hong
Kong are as a novelist and that he has no intention to use Tai Kwun as a
platform to promote his personal political interests," Calnin said in a
statement.
Over all of this --
Mallet's visa refusal, Badiucao's cancelled show, Andy Chan's banned
party, and all the protests and demonstrations they inspired -- hangs a
long delayed anti-sedition provision contained within the Basic Law, the
city's de facto constitution.
Article
23 of Basic Law instructs the local government to "enact laws on its
own to prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition, subversion
against the Central People's Government ... and to prohibit political
organizations or bodies of the region from establishing ties with
foreign political organizations or bodies."
Attempts
to implement the law in 2003 sparked massive street protests which
eventually saw it shelved, but it has remained a priority of the central
government and current leader Carrie Lam has vowed to create "suitable
conditions" for passing the law, though she has not outlined any
timetable.
While the Hong Kong
government has shown it is not lacking in powers to go after protesters
or dampen expression, Article 23 would massively expand the amount of
forbidden topics in a city already nervous about its freedoms, and
possibly even end its role as a hub for international media in Asia.
Speaking to reporters at the Tai Kwun event, Ma Jian said people nevertheless need to "have the courage to break" through self-censorship.
"The
freedom to speak is the basis of our civilization," he added. "We have
to safeguard our freedom of expression. We have to safeguard our
civilization."
No comments: