Like Tree495Likes

SCMP Bias - What & where is it?

Reply
Page 6 of 53 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 14 ... LastLast
  1. #51
    David Smith

    So today, the story of the trees in sai Ying pun continues. Two weeks ago when it was useful to divert attention from the police watchdog ruling, a single tree falling down merited front page news. Today, the same trees - well 4 neighbouring trees - feature in a story, but it does not put the government in a good light. So it is relegated to a small article, deep inside the city supplement (page 4) and only a black and white photo. Also without before and after pics. The trees were 100s years old, had heritage value and were cut down without consulting an expert committee and only giving the district council 30 or 45 minutes notice.

    What makes the front page?

    A US diplomat saying Hk is well governed and needs to return to a 'moderate path', singapore 50 year celebrations and a mainland script writer being allowed to visit imprisoned former officials to help him prepare a drama about anti-corruption campaign that will be shown on mainland TV.

    The U.S. Diplomat is likely misquoted, as reading the article one gets the sense his statement was that contrary to some claims, bickering over political reform has not made the city ungovernable. Other statements which could, but of course are not, made into the headline or quotes are 'it is healthy to have different views about how HK should be governed' and 'pro-establishment camp allegations about the U.S. Embassy dismissed as absurd and silly'.

    In my view the front page items today should be 1) CY's (in my opinion reasonable) suggestion that laissez faire is outdated and government policy should change, 2) the trees, 3) increased lead blood testing capacity and a petition by affected residents for a full legco enquiry, not just one staffed by CE appointees.

    Of course with the tree incident and upcoming elections there is no analysis of what exactly the district councils are for, if they have no power over local issues such as trees (just one example). Are they simply there to voice support for the government? Nor any mention of pan democrat suggestions for a tree protection law, nor mention that such was proposed over 10 years ago by a pro-BJ politician, but vetoed by the CE before it could even be voted on by legco (any proposal for a new law affecting government policy must have CE's approval before being added to legco agenda). What does that say about legco's power?

    http://m.scmp.com/article/427499/leg...-special-trees
    http://m.scmp.com/article/686170/dem...protection-law

    Finally, it is no surprise that the mock Legco assembly by young people and interesting voting results is not reported in scmp at all.https://www.hongkongfp.com/2015/08/1...ative-council/

    Cho-man and Gatts like this.

  2. #52

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652

    There was a historic vote to reject the HKU's management's choice of a senior manager. This clearly politicised the University which had been a bastion of liberal free speech in Asia for 100 years. This is a major change to society as appointments from now on can be screen by the CCP, so it is possible that HKU will become a different place quite quickly an no longer provide a balanced view of social issues in Hong Kong. No doubt people will have a probably rose tinted belief that western undergrads are better (really they are not) and that post grad research is not so important as it is not so visible.

    HKU becoming managed by the CCP is surely the biggest news of the day for Hong Kong.

    What does the SCMP lead with on its HK website?



    A minor enemy of the CCP talking to the son of an ex-prime minister of a smaller G7 country.

    Last edited by East_coast; 30-09-2015 at 08:28 AM.
    Cho-man and Gatts like this.

  3. #53

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    薄扶林
    Posts
    47,963

    It is in the dead tree version. Have not seen the online version yet.

    bookblogger likes this.

  4. #54

    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    3,921
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast:
    There was a historic vote to reject the HKU's management's choice of a senior manager. This clearly politicised the University which had been a bastion of liberal free speech in Asia for 100 years. This is a major change to society as appointments from now on can be screen by the CCP, so it is possible that HKU will become a different place quite quickly an no longer provide a balanced view of social issues in Hong Kong. No doubt people will have a probably rose tinted belief that western undergrads are better (really they are not) and that post grad research is not so important as it is not so visible.

    HKU becoming managed by the CCP is surely the biggest news of the day for Hong Kong.

    What does the SCMP lead with on its HK website?



    A minor enemy of the CCP talking to the son of an ex-prime minister of a smaller G7 country.
    Well, I'm not surprised one bit by the SCMP's online coverage.

    But as for the story itself, the rejection of Chan, this is a very dangerous precedent. We are heading down a slippery slope now. If the CCP-backed council can screen and pick and choose who to be vice-chancellor. Then its only a short hop to some of them imposing what academics can and cannot teach. And by extension, what they can and cannot research based on political considerations.

    And before we know it, HKU will be destroyed.
    Last edited by Cho-man; 30-09-2015 at 09:43 AM.

  5. #55

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast:
    I find the articles from Tammy Tam to be the most unpalatable.
    All her hard work of writing what appears appallingly biased and inline with Liaison office edicts seems to of paid-off.

    Her dirge can be seen below
    Tammy Tam | South China Morning Post

    Her reward
    Tammy Tam named as South China Morning Post editor-in-chief | South China Morning Post

    Some might say that faithfully regurgitating and embellishing what has been given you results in a promotion under an authoritarian regime.
    Last edited by East_coast; 07-11-2015 at 02:55 PM.
    Cho-man, shri and Gatts like this.

  6. #56

    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    474

    SCMP has become the CCP mouthpiece since it was acquired by a patriot Merchant in 1993


  7. #57
    David Smith

    I think the SCMP redeemed itself somewhat with its coverage of the recent district council elections. It was the best and most comprehensive English language source. Sure the bias was there, but there were various articles pointing out all different sides and they didn't buy the DABs claim of not losing any seats and publicly refuted it.You could see the conflicting wishes of the journalists in the editors quite clearly in some cases, where headlines contradicted the content of the articles themselves.

    In contrast the China Daily, RTHK and The Standard were in sync claiming the DAB lost no seats and that the election was characterized by a desire for young faces and change (but only in the abstract) and that sensible voters completely rejected radical candidates. To draw identical conclusions on the same day from such a confusing set of election results, means there must have been some dark hand behind it. It is a clever take, but falls down in a few areas - many youngsters on both sides suceeded, but Christopher Chung was beaten by a newcomer in his 40s and Albert Ho was beaten by Junius Ho who is in his 50s. While it is true LSD and People Power failed to get any seats, the new umbrella soldiers are hardly moderates. Further the Neo-Democrats, hardly moderates, had a run away success. Indeed, looking at the data more closely, LSD did not have any DC Councillors to begin with and one present (Maria Tam) and one past (Johnny Mak) People Power member maintained their DC seats under different party names.

    Last edited by David Smith; 26-11-2015 at 11:34 PM.

  8. #58
    David Smith

    I actually can't find the SCMP article anymore, but I clearly remember reading on or around 26 November that although most lawmakers voted in favour of a motion to scrap the TSA, the motion was defeated "on a technicality" (as insufficient FC lawmakers supported it). Describing this as "a technicality" is woefully inadequate and must be the result of editorial interference. The Legco split voting mechanism was introduced for precisely this reason: to allow a handful of FC legislators to veto a motion that has majority support.

    The oddity in this case was that the government policy was so unpopular that a large number of FCs abstained, rather than voting against the motion. An abstention has the same effect as voting against, because for a motion to pass, a majority of the FC legislators present need to vote in favour, not just a majority of the FCs who actually vote. Abstaining allows the FC legislators to save face with their constituents, and is for example commonly used by the FTU, who tend to abstain on livelihood measured proposed by pan-democrats. In this case the intended recipient was the government, rather than FC constituents: the large number of abstentions sent a coded message of disapproval to the government, without appearing too disloyal.

    The article also failed to mention that Albert Chan of People Power tabled the motion, probably because it was popular and in line with public opinion, but he is from a radical party which the newspaper can only vilify.

    Last edited by David Smith; 01-12-2015 at 11:18 PM.

  9. #59

  10. #60

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,896

    Not to forget this:

    [Hong Kong Indigenous] operates on the principle of using violence to fight “oppression”, and has rejected the more peaceful approach adopted by the Occupy movement in 2014.

    From here:
    Hong Kong Indigenous leader Ray Wong arrested, as 1967 leftists condemn radicals who attacked police in Mong Kok | South China Morning Post


Reply
Page 6 of 53 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 14 ... LastLast