May 3 is
World Press Freedom Day, a day which reminds the world of people’s rights to
hold opinions, and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas and
thoughts as stated in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The media has
an important role in this regard, as they hold a duty to disseminate information
of great public concern to society.
However, the
International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) continues to receive many complaints
from media all over greater
China — Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau and
Mainland China — that they
have been subject to
various kinds of pressure which impede the fulfilling of this duty.
Mainland
China
Many Mainland
Chinese journalists complain that the present working environment for
journalists is much worse than during last year’s crackdown following calls for
a ‘Chinese Jasmine Revolution’.
2012 has been
witness to tightening of restriction on China’s traditional and online media. China’s
microblogs have implemented real-name registration, which deters people’s
willingness to freely express their opinion. In addition, many Mainland Chinese
websites have been forced to close.
According to
a report in British newspaper The
Guardian, at least six people, including finance journalist Li Delin, weredetainedby police for alleged dissemination of rumours of a coup on April 1.
During the same period, two popular microblog service companies, Sina and
Tencent had their comment functions suspended for three days. The accounts of four
bloggers —Yang Haipeng, Zhang Ming, He Bing
and Shen Yafei (account name Shi Feike) —were
also shut down by Sina without any notification or explanation. Posts
addressing issues of great public concern also continue to be frequently deleted
from microblogs.
For traditional
media, the system of censorship remains unchanged. Newspapers report that they
continuously receive various restrictive orders from government authorities,
identifying which issues cannot be reported or which editorial perspective must
be used.
In 2012 so
far, restrictive orders have been issued by China’s Central Propaganda
Department advising media organisations not to publish reports or commentary on
the election of Hong Kong’s Chief Executive, the series of self-immolation of
Tibetan monks in Sichuan, the illegal house arrest of blind activistChen
Guangchengand his wife Yuan Waijing, and Chen’s subsequent escape, and
the unfolding political scandal of Bo
Xilai, former Party Secretary of Chongqing City. Two journalists, Chu Zhaoxin and Wang
Sijing, were reportedly interrogated by police because Chu had covered the Bo
Xilai scandal. Orders have also been received
regulating the number of articles published on certain topics or incidents.
The threat of
physical harm or intimidation continues to be a presence in the day-to-day work
of journalists in Mainland China.
Tao Xingying
of Xinmin Evening Post and Shen Kunyu
of Oriental Sports Daily were
physically assaulted by Guo Jun, the Secretary of the Dalian Football Club in
Dalian City, in China’s north-east Liaoning province, on April 21. Tao’s was choked
and kicked while being pushed to the ground by Guo. Although Guo apologised a
few days later and China’s General Administration of Sport affirmed that
journalists should be protected from such attacks when they are exercising
their duties, similar violent and humiliating incidents continue to pose a
challenge to the work of journalists in China.
Journalists also
continue to live under threat of punishment for exercising their duties. Luo
Xiaoming, Yang Shengdong and Shu Gangbin, senior managers of Biancheng Evening News, weresuspendedfrom their duties by the propaganda department of
Huaihua, a
prefecture-level city of Hunan Province in south central China, after the paper
published the results of a survey in which residents expressed dissatisfaction
with local officials.
Conditions for foreign journalists working in China are also becoming
more difficult. The movements of foreign journalists are quite limited,
particularly within Tibet, Tibetan-populated areas in Sichuan and Xinjiang, and
even some areas that do not require special entry permits. The challenges of
securing visas continues to frustrate the work of foreign journalists in China,
with the threat of delays or rejections being used to intimidate and threaten
journalists perceived as reporting negatively.
China’s
general public also continues to be restricted from enjoying its right to freedom
of expression. A number of protestors, including activist Wu Guanhuang, were
either detained or charged by police while taking pictures in a public area in
Guangzhou, Guangdong Province in April 2012. Chinese writer Yang Weidong and
Tibetan writer Tsering Woeser were also prevented from leaving China by Beijing’s
police.
Hong Kong
It is a well-accepted
idea that freedom of expression is one of the pillars of individual rights. It
is therefore in the interests of all that societies should take action to
ensure the existence of a free, pluralistic and independent media. However, these
rights are undermined in Hong Kong by the exercising of self-censorship by the
media.
During the 2012
election campaign for the new Chief Executive of Hong Kong, reports suggested
that Hao Tiechuan, the Director of the Chinese Liaison Office in Hong Kong -
Mainland Central Government’s formal representative in the territory - had
interfered with the reporting of the elections. The owner of the Hong Kong Economic Journal, Richard Li
Rzar-Kai, was allegedly approached by Hao, who left a message to chastise the
newspaper for its perceived negative coverage of the Chinese Liaison Office and
Leung Chun-Ying, the new Chief Executive. Although Li has denied of receiving
such calls, senior management of other media outlets have complained that they were
pressured to receive calls or dine with Hao when sensitive news related to him
or Central Authority arose.
Another
newspaper, Sing Pao,altered an article by a well-known
commentator, Johnny YS Lau, from refusing to support any of the Chief Executive
candidates to endorsing one of the candidates. Lau’s contract was subsequently terminated
on April 12, without explanation after he wrote an article paying tribute to the
late renowned dissident and astro-physicist Feng Lizhi on April 9, 2012. Sing Pao’s website was blocked for
Mainland Chinese readers on April 9, and it is alleged that an order was given
that Lau’s contract be terminated shortly afterwards. The newspaper has
continued to self-censor, with a column about blind activist Chen Guangcheng
removed from its official website on April 30.
In addition
to media exercising self-censorship, the ability of Hong Kong’s media to cover
news is also limited by government departments. The Police and Fire Departments
of Hong Kong have been tightly controlling the dissemination of information to the
media since the introduction of changes to their communication systems. The Police
Department have even begun to increase their control over the movement of the
media by establishing ‘media zones’ outside of the Chinese Liaison Office, the official representative body of the Central
Authority of China, in
Hong Kong. On numerous occasions, photographers have been prevented from taking
photos outside of this area and during demonstrations. Poon Ching-Ki, a photographer for
the Hong Kong Economic Times, was
pushed and detained by a policeman while taking photos of a public protest on during the
Chief Executive Election debate on March
19, 2012
Freedom of expression also continues to be tightly controlled. Some of
Hong Kong’s District Council legislators and firefighters have reported that
they have been prevented from hanging posters critical of government policy or
advocating for changes to working conditions outside their housing estates and
fire stations. Apparently, such posters were tolerated prior to the recent
elections of the new Chief Executive.
Macau
In Macau, the
practice of media self-censorship has drawn an outcry from both the public and
media personnel.
The Associação dos
Jornalistas de Macauissued
an open letter on April 26, and encouraged journalists to wear black T-shirts
to work on May 1 to lament the worsening state of press freedom in Macau.
In the open
letter, the journalists complained of the deletion or alteration of articles
that provided dissenting opinions from official government views. Other
complaints included pressure to under-report the public consultations on
political reform, the forcing of independent journalists from the workplace and
the restriction of journalists’ movement by police. Ava Chan, newly
resigned from Macau’s public broadcaster, Teledifusão de Macau S.A., has
commented that self-censorship was already common practice in Macau’s media industry
but lately the situation has worsened. Many sensitive stories on topics such as
political reform are refused publication by senior staff, or assigned to
inexperienced graduates or interns. Felix Wong Chi-Keung, a photographer for
the South China Morning Post, was refused
entry to Macao on May 1, for the third time since 2009, with the excuse that he
was a risk to social stability. Macau’s reducing press freedoms have also drawn
attention from other media association such as the Macau Media Club.
For Macau’s
general public the rights to freedom of expression were also limited. For
example, an activist was hand-cuffed and detained by police when he refused to
put on a coat to obscure his T-shirt, which called for redress for the victims
of the Tiananmen Square massacre, during a public consultation session
conducted by the local government.
Taiwan
For the Media in Taiwan, one the greatest challenges continues to be the
threat of criminal defamation charges. Since Lin Chau-yi, former Chairperson of
the Taiwan Journalists Association and a reporter for independent news website
Newtalk, and Su Jeng-ping, the website’s administrator, were sued for criminal
defamation by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Hsieh Guo-liang in
relation to an article they published on September 2, 2011, many media
personnel, media academics and civil society activists have expressed their
concern that Taiwan’s out-dated criminal defamation laws jeopardise press
freedom. However, so far the Government of Taiwan has not given merit to their
concerns.
The increased monopolization of media ownership is another threat to media
diversity in Taiwan. Want Want China Broadband, a subsidiary of the Want Want
Group, already owns several newspapers, magazines and terrestrial and satellite
television stations in Taiwan. It is now seeking permission from Taiwan’s
National Communications Commission to purchase an additional 11 cable
television companies for TWD 76 billion (approximately USD 2.6 billion). This
would allow the company to secure 23 per cent of Taiwan’s market of cable
subscribers. The purchase would enable the company to control one-third of
Taiwan’s media market.
The pursuit of revenue at the expense of independence has also become a
feature of the Taiwanese media sector. Increasingly, media rely upon paid
advertorials for their content, rather than maintaining an independent
editorial position.
Conclusion
World Press
Freedom Day, May 3, is a date to celebrate the fundamental principles of press
freedom — to evaluate press freedom around
the world, to defend the media from attacks on their independence and to pay
tribute to journalists who have lost their lives in the exercise of their
profession.
In the spirit
of World Press Freedom Day, the IFJ urges China’s President Hu Jintao and Premier
Wen Jiabao, President of the Republic of China Ma Ying-jeou, Chief Executive of
Hong Kong Donald Tsang Yam-Kuen and Chief Executive–Elect Leung Chun-ying, and Chief
Executive of Macau Fernando Chui Sai-On to do their utmost to ensure all levels
of government respect the right of the media rights to do their job without
fear of intimidation or interference. We call on them to respect the rights of all
citizens to the freedom of expression enshrined in their constitutions and
domestic laws.
The IFJ also
calls on all media personnel to remain strong in the defence of press freedom. All
media are reminded of their duty to serve the interests of society as a whole,
rather than merely government authorities or commercial sectors.
For
further information contact IFJ Asia-Pacific on +61 2 9333 0950
The
IFJ represents more than 600,000 journalists in 131 countries
Find the IFJ on Twitter: @ifjasiapacific
Find the IFJ on Facebook: www.facebook.com/IFJAsiaPacific