Don’t mourn for Hong Kong’s Press Freedom, Defend it

Yuen Chan
7 min readAug 18, 2020


This is an extended version of a piece I wrote for The Conversation UK, which you can see here:

When more than 200 police officers raided the headquarters of Hong Kong’s biggest — and only — pro-democracy mass-circulation newspaper, Apple Daily, on August 10, many people were quick to declare the death of press freedom in the territory.

Earlier that day, they had arrested the paper’s owner, 72 year-old tycoon Jimmy Lai, under a controversial new National Security Law (NSL) for allegedly colluding with foreign forces. He has since been released on bail.

Jimmy Lai led through Apple Daily HQ by police (Source: Apple Daily Livestream)

For Apple Daily reporter Patrick*, the symbolism was clear: “[It was] the state apparatus using a paramilitary force to intrude upon a media organisation that holds a critical stance.

Officers were searching journalistic material. It’s a clear message, this will happen to you if you’re disobedient.”

Freedom of the press is enshrined in Hong Kong’s Basic Law but has suffered in recent years from political and economic pressure and resultant creeping self-censorship, which is reflected in the territory’s poor recent performance in press freedom indices. Yet Hong Kong’s media is still relatively independent and robust — especially compared with mainland China.

The NSL, drafted and approved in Beijing, threatens to change that. It introduces sweeping but vague charges of subversion, secession, collusion with foreign forces and terrorism. Incitement of hatred against the national and local governments is also outlawed.

I spoke with several local reporters working in TV, radio, newspapers and online media to find out what it’s like on the ground, one and a half months after the NSL was passed. All but one, including Patrick, quoted above, requested that I use an alias when quoting them for fear of reprisals.

Self-censorship and losing freedom from fear

Many local journalists report increased self-censorship. Patrick says he’s noticed that most mainstream media organisations now tend to quote already public comments of pro-independence figures rather than interview them directly, and that journalists are losing the “freedom from fear”.

After an interview, I do think about the risk … it’s just a fleeting moment of hesitation, but that moment is a kind of self-censorship.

Patrick says he doesn’t have to worry about censorship from his superiors but Raymond*, a journalist with 15 years experiences says: “On somewhat sensitive topics like Taiwan & Beijing, the censorship was already strong in the past, now it’s like every related story can be a tussle.

Certain editors who were conservative [before] now have an even greater tendency to toe the official line.”

Selene*, a television reporter, says that when interviewing pro-independence figures she and other journalists now avoid discussing advocacy for international sanctions. Journalists worry about showing shots of protest banners with the popular slogan “Liberate Hong Kong”, which the government says violates the NSL.

James*, a reporter at I-Cable, is worried that reports deemed critical of the police — for instance mentioning the failure to respond to calls for help from citizens attacked by thugs in July 2019 — could result in charges of incitement of hatred against the authorities:

The red lines are expanding quickly to include anything the regime disagrees with … it’s very hard to practice journalism in such an oppressive space.

Protecting sources

Although the government has said the NSL will only target a minority of people, it has already had a chilling effect on freedom of expression, according to the journalists I spoke with. Newspaper reporter Kristy* says interviewees have become reluctant to speak on the record, or at all, while journalists are afraid they’ll be forced to divulge their sources.

Alvin Lum, who covers local politics for the independent online outlet CitizenNews (and was happy for me to use his name) says the NSL is a “game-changer”. It requires journalists to hand over “journalistic materials” and the law is unclear whether reporting certain views could be seen as advocacy.

Trusted media?

Journalists already reeling from the Apple Daily raid on Monday were further stunned by an interview the Police Commissioner Chris Tang Ping-keung gave to the local media outlet HK01 (whose owner has extensive business interests in the Mainland)in which he revealed the police had instituted a “pilot scheme” to only allow “trusted media outlets” to report from inside police cordons.

Tang said “trusted media” were those who had previously reported fairly, professionally and not obstructed the work of police officers.

This new policy was adopted during the raid on Apple Daily, during which journalists from some local and international news agencies were barred from entering the cordon area. It has increased already strained relations between journalists and the police.

In May, the Hong Kong Journalists Association said that 141 out of 222 journalists who responded to a survey on violence against journalists covering the protests that began in 2019, had been treated violently by the police.

One journalist I spoke to says journalists covering police press conferences are routinely worried about potential repercussions for asking critical questions. She explains news editors regularly get calls from media officers complaining that individual reporters had been “disobedient” or “rude”.

Press under pressure

A number of other recent incidents have shaken confidence in press freedom. One is a series of attacks on the government-funded public broadcaster RTHK, including government criticism of a journalist who asked a World Health Organization official about Taiwan’s (non) membership of the WHO. The government has since ordered a far-reaching six-month review of RTHK.

RTHK producer interviews WHO official (Source: RTHK)

The latest controversy to hit the broadcaster is the removal of a 31 July programme from its archive that featured an interview with pro-democracy activist Nathan Law Kwun-chung, who is currently in the United Kingdom but is reportedly wanted on NSL charges. One staffer says they’ve since been told they can report on fugitives but can’t pro-actively reach out to them for interviews.

Another concern is recent changes in top management at NOW TV and I-Cable, both until now well regarded as relatively independent news operations. The new managers are either regarded as pro-Beijing, or are less qualified than those they replaced.

The changes sent a chill through journalists in other newsrooms. “It doesn’t matter how good the reporters are or how supportive the middle management staff are, the bosses and senior editors always have the final say,” notes Kristy who adds that censorship isn’t always explicit.

“They can use other ways to discourage a journalist from covering sensitive/political stories, such as being unreasonably demanding over these stories for the sake of so-called balanced reporting …This is already happening.”

Meanwhile there have been press reports that the government has set up a new national security unit to vet visas for foreign journalists. Using journalist visas as retribution is a common practice in the Mainland, but was unheard of in Hong Kong until the de facto expulsion of Financial Times editor Victor Mallet in 2018.

Given the uncertainties created by the NSL, and escalating tensions between Beijing and Washington — in which journalist visas have become tools of retaliation — foreign media organisations may be tempted to follow the New York Times, which recently relocated part of its Hong Kong-based operations to Seoul.

Apple Daily reporter Patrick says: “I hope the international media don’t leave Hong Kong so easily, or station fewer journalists here. Having more media reporting in Hong Kong will help to protect Hong Kong’s press freedom.”

Alive but hanging by a thread

There is a tendency when describing developments in Hong Kong to resort to hyperbole — it’s always the “darkest day”, or the “coldest winter” or the death of Hong Kong’s autonomy, freedoms or rule of law, even of the city itself.

The gradual undermining of values, safeguards and institutions that underpin Hong Kong in recent years — and especially since the 2019 protests — reveals the inadequacy of such language. There is a common saying about this decline that “there is no most, only more” — meaning things can be expected to worsen.

Hong Kong’s media will face more challenges ahead. Its journalists are nervous and fearful — and some are seriously considering their future in journalism. One of the frontline journalists I spoke to described press freedom as being “seriously ill” and another said it was “close to death”.

But they aren’t ready to give up. Some told me the raid and arrests have only strengthened their resolve to keep going for as long as they can.

“We’ll take one step at a time. [Press freedom] isn’t dead, there are a lot of reporters working hard!” Selene told me.

Screen grab from live-stream of Apple Daily being printed

She pointed out that Apple Daily was still publishing — it printed hundreds of thousands of extra copies after the raid and live-streamed the production process. Citizens eagerly snapped up copies, bought shares in the paper’s parent company Next Digital, and paid for ads in the paper’s pages.

As industry veteran Raymond says:

“Everyone — the public, reporters, editors, interviewees — is a part of this struggle for press freedom. It’s alive as long as people are willing to keep it alive.”

* Most journalists’ identities have been disguised in this article.



Yuen Chan

Journalist. Lecturer at the Dept of Journalism at City, University of London, formerly taught at CUHK. Hongkonger. South Londoner.