[ad_1]
HONG KONG — From 18th place to 140th. That’s how much Hong Kong’s ranking plunged in a global press freedom index over some 20 years.
Behind the decline are the shutdown of pro-democracy newspaper Apple Daily, more red lines for journalists and increasing self-censorship across the territory. The erosion of press freedom parallels a broader curtailment of the city’s Western-style civil liberties since 2020, when Beijing imposed a national security law to eradicate challenges to its rule.
Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai was convicted in December under the security law, facing up to life in prison. Hearings will begin on Monday for Lai and other defendants in the case to argue for a shorter sentence.
His trial has been watched closely by foreign governments and political observers as a barometer of media freedom in the former British colony, which returned to Chinese rule in 1997. The government insists that his case has nothing to do with press freedom.
Hong Kong’s media environment was once freewheeling. Journalists often asked the government aggressive questions even as the owners of their outlets were pro-Beijing. News outlets regularly broke stories critical of politicians and officials.
But the space for reporters has drastically narrowed after China imposed the security law, which it deemed necessary for stability after huge anti-government protests in 2019.
In 2020, Lai became one of the first prominent figures charged under the law. Within a year, authorities used the same law to arrest senior executives of Apple Daily. They raided its office and froze $2.3 million of its assets, effectively forcing the newspaper to shut down in June 2021.
Online news site Stand News met a similar fate in December of that year, with arrests, police raids and asset freezes forcing its shutdown. By 2022, Hong Kong had plunged 68 places to 148th in the press-freedom index compiled by media freedom organization Reporters Without Borders.
In 2024, two Stand News editors became the first journalists since 1997 to be convicted of conspiracy to publish seditious articles under a separate, colonial-era law.
In December, Lai was found guilty of conspiring with others to collude with foreign forces and conspiracy to publish seditious articles. Six Apple Daily executives charged in the same case had entered guilty pleas, admitting they conspired with Lai to request sanctions, blockades or engage in other hostile activities against Hong Kong or China.
Francis Lee, a journalism and communication professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, said the Apple Daily and Stand News cases indicate that some common news practices of the past are no longer permitted. The Stand News case showed that some strongly critical commentaries with relatively intense expression might be considered seditious, he said. Lai’s case involved allegations of calling for foreign sanctions.
“Maybe some advocacy journalism was at least permitted within the legal framework back then,” he said, referring to before the security law was introduced. “Today, it’s no longer allowed.”
Self-censorship has become more prominent, but not only because of politics. Lee said mainstream news outlets face greater pressure not to upset their vital revenue streams, including advertisers and big companies, amid a difficult business environment.
Many large companies in the city value the vast mainland Chinese market and ties with the government.
Finding interviewees is not easy, either. “In Hong Kong nowadays, when some topics and perspectives cannot be reported, it’s not just because of media outlets practicing self-censorship,” Lee said. “No one is willing to speak. Self-censorship is a broad social phenomenon.”
Many opposition politicians and leading activists were jailed under the security law. Dozens of civil society groups closed down. Facing potential risks, some residents also became more reluctant to talk to reporters.
Hong Kong Journalists Association chairperson Selina Cheng said many stories perceived to be politically sensitive or potentially questioning the authorities are not always easily published. There is an outsized concern over including responses from the government and pro-China groups to create balance, she said.
“To do journalism in Hong Kong means that people always have to worry at the back of their heads: What are the risks that they may get involved in?” said Cheng.
A massive fire that killed at least 161 people in an apartment complex in late November revealed some of these shifts.
After the fire broke out on Nov. 26, reporters, including those from newer online outlets, went out in force to cover Hong Kong’s deadliest blaze in decades. They interviewed affected residents, investigated scaffolding nettings that authorities said had contributed to the blaze’s rapid spread, and reported on concerns over the government’s oversight.
Cheng was encouraged by the coverage of the aftermath. But warnings and arrests followed.
Beijing’s national security arm in Hong Kong summoned representatives of several foreign news outlets, including The Associated Press, on Dec. 6. The Office for Safeguarding National Security said some foreign media had spread false information and smeared the government’s relief efforts after the fire and attacked the legislative election.
After arrests of non-journalists who posted allegedly seditious content online or organized a petition, public voices grew quieter, leaving reporters with fewer interviewees, Lee said.
A planned news conference related to the fire, organized by people including former pro-democracy district councilors, was canceled. Bruce Liu, an organizer, was summoned by police for a meeting the same day. An investigative report on the maintenance project by a pro-Beijing newspaper is no longer viewable on its website.
Ellie Yuen, who wrote a social media post questioning regulators’ oversight that went viral, said she stopped posting about the fire for “obvious reasons” without elaborating.
Cheng raised concerns over what she called the “more covert muscling of people speaking out.”
“If this keeps happening, then it’s much harder for the public to know what they’re missing out on,” she said.
In an emailed reply to the AP’s questions, the government strongly condemned attempts to use the fire as an excuse to smear the administration with baseless accusations.
“Human rights and freedoms of Hong Kong residents have all along been firmly protected by the constitution and the Basic Law,” it said.
Beyond reporting restrictions, Cheng’s trade union previously raised concerns about some journalists facing unwarranted tax audits and harassment through anonymous messages. The Inland Revenue Department has maintained that the background of a taxpayer has no bearing on its reviews.
Cheng has launched a lawsuit against her former employer, The Wall Street Journal, for allegedly firing her over her union role.
Both Cheng and Lee said journalists are still learning to survive in the narrowing space.
In October, Cheng’s association showed journalists’ ratings of the city’s press-freedom index rebounded slightly.
“Today’s situation is far from the previous state of freedom,” Lee said. “Self-censorship throughout society is severe. Yet some media outlets are still finding ways.”
[ad_2]
