記者之聲The Journalist (HKJA)

《記者之聲》 2011年11月號目錄

2011-11-23T03:57:00.001-08:00

專題：免費報　　　Focus: Freebies

標題 Item Title	作者 Author
封面故事｜免費報越多，市民越著數？　　九月中，壹傳媒集團的《爽報》殺入免費報章市場，正式掀起免費、收費報章大戰......	尤翠茵、曾錦雯
封面故事｜昔：鐵腳馬眼神仙肚　今：採寫編一職多能　　免費報發行量大，人手卻相對精簡，記者傾向一職多能。縱向從採訪、編輯到美術排版；橫向從港聞到財經娛樂，都要一手包辦。傳媒集團拓展免費報市場，同系收費報章記者的角色也有微妙轉變......	雷子樂、曾錦雯
封面故事｜廣告人：免費報將來會成為主流　　隨著爽報的出現，香港總共有六份免費報紙，每天有300萬份免費報紙派發，較收費報紙每日出紙的100萬份還要多，廣告公司的行政總裁曾錦強認為免費報將影響銷量非頭一二位的傳統報紙......	譚蕙芸
封面故事｜香港這場仗更難打！　　台灣爽報前總監李月華在接受訪問的時候認為，香港爽報面對五個已經佔據市場的免費報對手，戰役比台灣難打......	譚蕙芸
封面故事｜免費報工作的苦與樂　　還在求學階段，已經踏足一名實習記者的道路。原因只有一個，就是這份工作太有意義了。在這個世代尤其有意義。在個人利益掛帥的今天，人要堅守人性價值不容易......	鄭秀韻
記協之聲｜通脹太高了　傳媒加薪追不了	莊曉陽
城中熱話｜警方要挫傳媒銳氣　我變成「企圖爆竊」	曾愛盈
記協之聲｜記者宵夜有乜好去處	陳凱迎
風聞｜多位記者負笈充電	《記聲》
風聞｜台灣記協雪中送炭　支持黑衫行動	《記聲》
風聞｜凌樹輝喜愛兒渡海奪冠	《記聲》
------------------------	-----------
Cover Story｜Freebies creating knowledge gap in society A war of the freebies has erupted. It came with the launch of Next Media's Sharp Daily in mid-September. There are now five Chinese and one English tabloids......	Gillian Yau, Phyllis Tsang
Cover Story｜All-in-one approach to journalism High-circulation of free newspapers does not mean better job opportunities for journalists. Those already on the job simply do more, with reporters doubling as editors or even doing the art work......	Ken Lui, Phyllis Tsang
Cover Story｜Freebies headed for the mainstream With the newly-launched Sharp Daily there are now six free daily newspapers in Hong Kong. That's a total of about 3 million copies distributed every day, or about three times the number of regular newspapers sold......	Vivian Tam
Cover Story｜Sharp Daily in Taiwan launched in double-quick time An interview with Daisy Li. Former News Director of Sharp Daily, Taiwan......	Vivian Tam
Cover Story｜Into a new dimension with am730 Two newspaper companies launched their own free newspapers recently, and suddenly freebies are the centre of attention in the media industry. When I meet reporters from other companies, I am invariably asked: “How are you going to fight this battle?” My usual reply is, "We'll just do our best!"......	Kusche Cheng
Voice of JA｜Media pay hikes trailing inflation	Chong Hiu Yeung
Talk of the Town｜Forced to urinate in the open...behind bars	Emily Tsang
Voice of Journalist｜Late night snacks with Sham Yee...	Jackie Chan
Gossip｜Back to school	"The Journalist"
Gossip｜Unity across the Straits	"The Journalist"
Gossip｜Lings across the harbour	"The Journalist"

免費報越多，市民越著數？

2011-11-22T07:26:00.000-08:00

尤翠茵、曾錦雯

【記聲2011年11月號】九月中，壹傳媒集團的《爽報》殺入免費報章市場，正式掀起免費、收費報章大戰。

香港的免費報業，從2002年只得一份《都市日報》，到2005年《頭條日報》、《am730》加入，瓜分免費報市塲一段長時間，初時也有淘汰收費報擔憂，但幾年下來影響未如預見顯著。最近3個月《晴報》、《爽報》加入，傳媒行業再度進入戰國年代的緊張氣氛，除了5份中文免費報相互競爭外，業界關注免費報市塲是否已經飽和？這次是否真的威脅了收費報的生存空間？

對於香港來說，這是創新紀錄，《爽報》9月出版後，香港共有6份免費報紙(1份英文，5份中文)。目前香港市面上每天出版約300萬份免費報紙，已經超越100萬份收費報紙。平均而言，是每兩個人便手擁一份報紙，但免費報紙以高密度形式在香港存在，是否能夠令我們的社會資訊更流通，加強第四權的力量，讓市民有更多得益？

顧名思義最基本的不同是免費報紙不收錢，換言之，免費報紙的讀者一般不會有太多期望，相反，收費報讀者付出金錢，最基本的要求是這些報紙要配合讀者的閱讀習慣。雖然一直以來，不少傳媒研究都証實，媒體早已在內容上為讀者作出決定，但讀者仍然是可以在付款買報的過程中「享受」一定程度上的選擇，並有所要求。但免費報紙是另一個故事，每天你上班前，電梯門打開，數份免費報紙已經整整齊齊的放在你面前，當你走到巴士站或地鐵站，又有一群「阿姐」很禮貌地為你奉上一份、兩份、三份........免費報，作為一個讀者，又有甚麼地方可以投訴之有？

結果，免費報紙最值錢的地方──銷量──讀者人數便是這樣煉成的，銷量數字背後就是爭取廣告收入。

報業集團「霸平台」

免費報發行量每天已經達300萬份

香港中文大學新聞與傳播學院教授蘇鑰機在過去數年都有跟進收費報紙和免費報紙的變化，他指出，某些收費報界是因為免費報紙的出現而進行「霸平台」的動作，造成此消彼長的狀態，如當年星島集團出版《頭條日報》，近期的經濟日報集團出版《晴報》，和壹集團出版的《爽報》。

他指出，免費報中的《都市日報》和《am730》，背後沒有收費報紙集團在「撐腰」，將來會否面臨重大經營困難，尚有待觀察。

所以，市面上再多一份免費報紙，影響主要在量的方面，而不在質的方面。現在市面上因為免費報紙所帶來的影響巳經發生，下一個影響將會是行業內部將會如何「洗牌」。

傳媒中人很關注誰會被淘汰，但仔細看看，這些擁有40萬，甚至90萬份流通量的免費報，在傳媒作為社會中第四權的角色下，曾經在社會起過哪些影響力？有沒有「爆過新聞」？有沒有報導一些調查性的新聞？或是曾經出現一些令整個社會不得不關注、不得不談論的新聞？答案很明顯，免費報紙的定位：只用提供簡單的資訊。當然，各報都有不同專欄去表現特色，但這些都是意見，不是真相，更不是新聞。免費報搶眼的版面位置要留給廣告。

市民「知識貧富鴻溝」

每天早上巴士站、地鐵站或路口，都有人派發多份的免費報。

免費報的定位不能只看成個別現象，這樣的生態對社會影響力不容低估，蘇鑰機指出，因為免費報紙的流行，出現了一個叫「知識鴻溝」(knowledge gap) 的社會現象，那是原本不看報紙的人，因為有了免費報紙而變成報紙讀者，對時事有點了解。但由於免費報的內容傾向短少精簡、不重分析，因此這些讀者只是「知多一點點」，與細看收費報的讀者在新聞認知的水平和深度有很大差距。於是社會上的時事知識分佈很不平均，雖然整體閱報的人數增加了，但在知識的貧富分野愈拉愈開。

這樣的情況不是香港獨有，其他地方的免費報紙也是扮演著相若角色。蘇鑰機指出，免費報或者風格不完全一樣，但同樣都是以大眾化為定位，就以歐洲的免費報紙為例，同樣走大眾化路線，而隨著時間發展，免費報的定位逐漸演變，同樣的情況相信也會在香港發生。但他相信，收費報紙和免費報紙始終各有分工，不會出現免費報紙完全「打低」收費報紙的情況。

昔：鐵腳馬眼神仙肚　今：採寫編一職多能

2011-11-21T07:29:00.000-08:00

雷子樂、曾錦雯

【記聲2011年11月號】免費報發行量大，人手卻相對精簡，記者傾向一職多能。縱向從採訪、編輯到美術排版；橫向從港聞到財經娛樂，都要一手包辦。傳媒集團拓展免費報市場，同系收費報章記者的角色也有微妙轉變......。

5份中文免費報紙的操作模式有所不同，《爽報》與《頭條日報》編制雖然同樣精簡，但背後是壹傳媒《蘋果日報》與星島集團的《星島日報》提供採訪內容與協助。

發行量大　截稿時間推前

《爽報》十月發行量90萬份，編寫部門約30多人，記者、編輯全部由《蘋果日報》各部組抽調，暫時沒自己的採訪隊伍，由《蘋果日報》記者供應新聞資料或稿件再改寫。為配合目標100萬份的發行量，《蘋果》、《爽報》記者首先面對的挑戰，就是要提早截稿。以《蘋果》港聞版A1的稿件為例，記者在晚上十時前就要交稿，整個編採部門的開會、定稿時間，也要向前推。提前截稿，新聞質素或會受影響，《蘋果日報》總編輯張劍虹表示，若新聞有最新進展，報館會不斷改版以確保質素。

對發行量過100萬份的《頭條日報》記者而言，「死線」不斷推前，已是常態。據了解，在印量多達過百頁，甚至140多版時，該報的截稿時間就要推前，死線目標有時是傍晚六時，但實際運作能達到七時半已不錯。因新聞不斷發生，所以要在短時間內做到快而無誤，壓力不少，愈近死線愈緊張。趕完第一輪紙，也不代表鬆口氣，當再有重要新聞發生，或是要優化第一輪已完稿的新聞，記者就要準備第二輪改寫。

《頭條日報》總編輯蕭世和指出，該報記者工作量與其收費姊妹報《星島日報》相近，由於《頭條》截稿時間較早，記者要有能力在短時間內完成「精簡」的重點稿件。新聞內容採取與《星島》「資源共用」原則，但有時候記者也要直接參與採訪。每宗新聞的稿件字數由300至500字，記者平均每日要寫三宗新聞。

記者要具多種才能

《am730》有別於傳統報章記者，交稿之後，免費報章記者還要兼顧「後期製作」。社長盧覺麟表示，該報要求記者抱「肯認識新事物」的心態，並要「能夠multi-tasks(多功能運作) 」辦事，以配合該報記者能就採訪、編輯、排版以及起標題的多功能集於一身的特點。

盧覺麟指出，該報會向新入職記者提供電腦排版軟件的訓練，以便記者也能掌握排版概念及工作。記者亦不像傳統收費報般有仔細分組或分工運作，例如主力寫港聞記者，有時候因為人手問題要協助收料、搵料撰寫國際、體育新聞，甚至娛樂新聞。

發行量約40萬份的《都市日報》，是本港免費報章的「老大哥」，該報助理總編輯梁錦雄表示，他們對記者的要求是效率要高、需兼顧採訪及上版工作，報道字數雖短，但偶爾會在報章最中間兩頁讓記者撰寫「大特寫」報道以補不足。「要求內容準確，無論免費、收費報章也是一樣」。

免費報的擴張，也令收費報記者的角色有微妙轉變。《蘋果日報》總編輯張劍虹表示，《蘋果》作為供應內容的單位，採訪部門安排記者工作時，會考慮《爽報》的取材，加以配合。「《爽報》係一份發行量80至100萬份的報章，新聞選材要更平民化、掌握城市脈搏，如消費新聞，日後《蘋果》也會採訪多些」。

《爽報》另一目標是要做有聲有畫有片有文字的新媒體，加上壹傳媒近年發展動新聞、即時新聞，張劍虹表示，《蘋果日報》記者的定位，會變成傳媒集團內的「內容供應者」，記者走在最前線，要懂得利用不同的表達方法，將同一宗新聞，演繹於不同的媒體上。

他舉例指，攝影記者從前只需拍好照片，現在到達採訪現場，首先需要拿出iPhone4拍照片供應即時新聞，接著是用攝影機拍片給動新聞和用相機拍照給《蘋果》、《爽報》。又例如早前匯豐銀行裁員的新聞，財經組記者當日其實早數小時已收到相關的消息及電郵，「明知呢個消息好快會通天，報紙記者收到料，都要決定係咪要立即報料比即時新聞，即使只得兩小時『獨家』，都要去做，大家思維都要變！」

編制小晉升機會也少

免費報大都只是約30人編制的編輯室運作，「報紙規模不大, 晉升機會不多」《am730》社長盧覺麟坦言，該報成立只是數年間, 故有部份記者創刊以來一直在此工作，也有記者做了數年後，轉到收費報，或者去working holiday, 有的會轉行。

盧覺麟指出，該報記者除了要擔任採訪與編輯排版的工作, 更會直接參與構思標題，可發揮及自由度不少。他認為報紙是「文字工作」，《am730》縱使是免費, 但記者是有機會寫深入分析或訪問文章。他指出，該報近期做了不少全版的人物專訪, 由林奮強、田北辰、李鵬飛到「甘仔」甘浩望神父等，記者有「寫作發揮的空間」。

他不諱言，相對傳統收費報, 免費報記者的前線採訪機會並不多, 「少D機會去做ASSIGNEMENT」，學習發問及質詢、親身到場採訪的機會，相應較少，不過，記者工作不止採訪, 也有很重要的分析環節，運作上有時候寧願記者省卻搭車時間，在公司「炒台」後有多點時間看看報告或資料, 可能時間運用效率更佳，「提問留番俾電視台(記者)做」。

《頭條日報》總編輯蕭世和表示，免費報的發行量極大，每份都是數以十萬計，記者如果做得好, 可以在社會發揮很大的影響力。

廣告人：免費報將來會成為主流

2011-11-20T07:27:00.000-08:00

譚慧芸

【記聲2011年11月號】隨著爽報的出現，香港總共有六份免費報紙，每天有300萬份免費報紙派發，較收費報紙每日出紙的100萬份還要多，廣告公司的行政總裁曾錦強認為免費報將影響銷量非頭一二位的傳統報紙。

問：記者之聲
答：廣告公司Group M行政總裁曾錦強

問：免費報9年前在香港出現，當時客戶接受嗎？

曾：初初也擔心，不知道報紙質素怎樣，不肯定免費的東西是否受歡迎。但客戶落廣告之後，發現反應不錯，就覺得「啊，免費報真係有人睇。」而我們建議客戶使用傳媒，是不會理會它是收費還是免費，最重要看兩點：一。讀者人數；二。讀者質素。

收費報廣告首當其衝

問：免費報的讀者人數和質素如何？

曾：免費報主要在地鐵站派發，故此多一點上班族拿到；但現在已入了屋苑，故此讀者群已很Mass（大眾化）。整體來說，3份免費報（頭條日報、AM730和都市日報）都是最多人看的報紙，故此會建議，希望進軍大眾化市場的客戶，可以在5份報紙上落廣告：3份免費報、東方日報、蘋果日報。這5份報紙已經接觸到所有看報紙的人。其實現在大部份客戶都係以這個模式落廣告，約佔整體客戶6至7成。若客戶想向高階層讀者（行政人員或經理級市民）打廣告，才會用經濟日報，信報和南華早報。我們計算過，若以廣告價錢和讀者人數來看，一般收費報的成本效益，不及免費報那麼好。

問：經濟日報的免費報「晴報」較新，又如何呢？

曾：坦白講，我覺得晴報不是很好看。但我們的內部調查發現，晴報一出，讀者人數已經比很多傳統收費報紙要高，令我有點訝異。可能媒介變成免費，人們覺得沒成本，總會拿來看看。

問：爽報加入了戰線之後，又如何？

免費報的激烈競爭有可能加速傳統報的死亡。

曾：本來傳統報紙可能沒有死得麼快，但爽報一出呢，就有機會將一些平日看蘋果日報的人轉過去睇爽報。因為爽報未出版前，喜歡看蘋果日報這種政治立場和「加鹽加醋」形式新聞的讀者，在免費報市場沒選擇。爽報一出，令蘋果日報的讀者有了免費代用品。再加上，我們覺得蘋果的讀者，跟東方日報的很相像，故此，我估計，爽報若搶走了別人的廣告，應該是來自蘋果日報和東方日報。

問：但台灣經驗說，爽報出版沒有令蘋果日報跌紙。

曾：台灣不同，爽報控制了發行網，沒有發行到較遠的鄉郊。但在香港，爽報一心要打擊頭條日報，一出就達到五十萬分。看來爽報在香港蠶食蘋果的機會，會比在台灣大。

問：傳聞東方日報也有計劃出免費報。

曾：如果是真的，真是加速了傳統報紙的死亡。長遠來說，未來的報紙市場可能是：7成讀者看免費報，3成讀者看高質素報紙（如信報，經濟日報和南早)。將來收費報紙會沒有甚麼生存空間。現在收費報紙要做，就只能做財經新聞。那些賣正氣（形象）乾淨路線，可以入到學校屋企的定位，其實免費報已經做緊。客戶覺得，頭條日報、AM730和都市日報都傾向正氣乾淨，沒有誇張圖片，所以收費報紙若純粹做「正氣」路線，未必可以殺出重圍。

收費報讀者老化

曾錦强

問：收費報的讀者是怎樣一群人？值得廣告客戶追捧嗎？

曾：收費報始終內容豐富得多，是一班相對「老化」的讀者，喜歡深入的分析。或許是退休人士，有財力，對廣告客戶不是不吸引。但讀者老化的問題，是死一個少一個。

問：一時之間免費報紙大量出版，會否令廣告效益下降？

曾：現在免費報吸引的廣告開支，佔所有報紙廣告市場的3成，仍有很多上升空間，故此免費報會先搶走收費報的廣告。至於免費報之間會否有淘汰賽嗎？也是有可能的，因為3成廣告要爬升到8成，也需要時間，過程之中可能有報紙會捱唔住。好像晴報出來的效果不大好，爽報出版可能加速晴報的滅亡也不一定。但長遠來說，我覺得香港可以承受4-5份免費報，300萬份也可以。到時的閱讀模式可能是，一個人拿幾份免費報，份份也不會看完，只挑自己喜歡的專欄來看。

問：你可以解釋免費報為何會成功？

曾：是天時地利人和。人們越來越不喜歡長篇的文字，喜歡短小精幹，精簡的內容。坐車20分鐘剛好看完一份免費報是很合適的長度。另外，互聯網的普及化，亦令我們閱讀習慣改變，較接受免費的資訊。

問：你會預計那些報紙最有危機？

曾：所有收費的報紙，不是頭一二位的銷量，都會好危險。新報，成報，太陽報，明報，都好危險。收費就要走很尊貴讀者的部份，只能是財經報紙，否則好難生存。又或者像東方日報或蘋果日報這些大堆頭的報紙，但若兩集團自己都出版免費報，也有可能生存不了。

廣告市場佔有率

	廣告營業額	佔報紙廣告市場（40億）比例
傳統收費報紙	28億	70%
頭條日報	6億	15%
AM730	3億	7.5%
都市日報	3億	7.5%

＊電視(30%)是本地廣告的最大市場，其次為報紙(25%=40億)，戶外(20%)，雜誌(15%)，互聯網(10%).　　資料來源：曾錦強個人估計

各報紙廣告收費

	全版廣告收費
南華早報	10餘萬
東方日報，蘋果日報	10萬
經濟日報	8-10萬
明報	5-6萬
頭條日報，星島日報	4-5萬
AM730，都市日報	2-2.5萬

香港這場仗更難打! －台灣爽報前總監李月華專訪

2011-11-19T08:56:00.000-08:00

李月華　台灣爽報前總監

【記聲2011年11月號】台灣爽報前總監李月華在接受訪問的時候認為，香港爽報面對五個已經佔據市塲的免費報對手，戰役比台灣難打。

問：為何台灣要出爽報（下稱台爽）？

答：黎智英早年不贊成在香港出免費報，他說過：「人們不會珍惜免費的東西，付費的才會珍惜」。他的意思是，免費報做不出「有諗頭」的東西，不如集中精神做好收費報。但台灣那邊他沒明確反對，適逢2006年台北市政府捷運局（相等於香港的港鐵），把捷運免費報專營權公開競投，台蘋廣告部同事認為，可開拓多一個廣告渠道，高層葉一堅向黎智英提出，黎不反對，就決定出版。（編按：後來捷運報專營權，被聯合報旗下UPaper取得，台爽就集中捷運站外派發）

問：台爽由決定到真正出版，只用了1個月時間（2006月9月中決定，10月23日出版），為何要那麼快？你們如何做到？

答：我們機構做事文化是先推出，再讓市場來測試。台爽拍板時，我在台蘋剛設立一個研究部，專責支援同事在深度報道時，進行外國資料搜集。我認為，把全隊人抽調過台爽，是最快的方法，於是研究部全部7人就變成台爽的寫稿員，再從台蘋借調文字編輯4-5人，美術編輯7人。至於台爽的副刊，就由台蘋記者多寫簡短版，或多拍幾張相供給台爽。基本上，台爽開始的編制，沒有增聘額外編輯人手。

問：台爽內容，是把台蘋現有的內容再改寫，為何不自行獨家採訪？

答：這是「好自然」的做法。台蘋每天有很多內容，免費報從中抽取，成本低，才有機會賺錢。

台爽生活化內容取勝

問：台爽會挑選那一些台蘋的新聞？

答：捷運搭客都是上班族和學生，生活化的東西最有吸引力。例如台北早餐店經常打價格戰，這類頭條很受歡迎。相反，一宗發生在鄉下的突發新聞，就不太吸引。

問：在版面設計上有那些策略?

答：捷運的車程一般只有20分鐘，我們亦不預計讀者會把報紙拿走，故此要滿足短時間閱讀，字數要少，頭條不超出400字，內頁新聞最長200字。圖片上我們強調visual flow(視覺流動性)，例如會以幾張連環的相片和美術圖片，表達一宗突發新聞，即使讀者只看圖，也能掌握個大概。另外，車廂閱讀顛簸，字型會比收費報大，行距亦疏一點。

台爽不影響台蘋銷量

問：台爽有沒有影響台蘋銷量?

答：台爽出版之後，台蘋的銷量沒有明顯下跌。我估計，台爽開拓了一些以前沒有買報紙的人，例如中學生。而這些學生的父母，或許家裏仍買一份台蘋，令台蘋維持一定銷量。

問：在工作流程上，台爽有沒有跟台蘋「分工」？

答：上頭指令很清晰，台蘋不能保留東西做「獨家」。故此，會出現台蘋和台爽，同一天以同一頭條出街，而翌日在（壹集團裏的檢討大會）「鋤報會議」裏，主管可能說：「爽報條題起得好過你」，令台蘋有壓力改進。我的看法是，報紙讀者下跌是大趨勢，我們要做得更好吸引讀者，某報銷量下跌，問題不在於免費報的出現。

問：香港爽報推出名人讀報聲音版，台爽又如何？

答：我們較「煞食」的是，除了國語版，亦推出台語版，並由同事讀出。至於為何推出聲音版本，我個人認為，壹集團現在是多媒體方向發展，聲音版是整個策略一部份，而且成本亦較低。

問：你們如何決定出版頁數?

答：主要看「飯碗」，即當天有多少廣告。我們的宗旨是，不能「頁頁是廣告」，必須有一定份量內容平衡。（筆者曾計算過，9月初一個周五，台爽出版60頁，廣告約佔一半版面。）

問：比較香港和台北兩地，兩張爽報有何不同挑戰？

答：香港這場仗更難打！首先，台爽出版時，台北只有一些文化味重的小眾免費報；相反，香港爽報要面對5個競爭對手。另外，香港有地產商會限制免費報進入它們旗下的屋苑，而台北就較少類似屋苑。至於成本方面，紙價，印刷和發行是主要開支，估計香港派報員人工應該較台灣貴。至於寫稿人手，由於主要使用台蘋內容，開支不算多。

問：免費報聘用較少編採人手，記者出路是否暗淡？

答：新聞傳媒行業，一定是走向多媒體，已經沒有了純粹文字者或純粹的圖片記者。記者需要掌握多元工具。如果一個記者可以分析，一宗新聞應該用錄像，文字還是聲音表達，這樣的記者一定不會失業。

李月華為爽報前總監，現職台灣蘋果日報網路中心總監

香港台灣爽報市場比較

	台灣	香港
爽報發行量	18萬	90-100萬
蘋果日報銷量	48萬 (台北銷量第1) ＊	26萬(香港銷量第2)
免費報競爭情況	台灣爽報 (大學生閱讀率 6成 ) 聯合報系UPaper (每日發行8萬份，大學生閱讀率4成)＊	頭條日報(每日發行80萬份) AM730(每日發行36萬份) 都市日報(每日發行30萬份) 晴報(每日發行50萬份) The Standard(每日發行22萬份)

＊銘傳大學2010年調查，調查對象為傳播科系大學生

免費報工作的苦與樂

2011-11-18T08:56:00.000-08:00

鄭秀韻　am730

【記聲2011年11月號】兩個報業集團近期先後出版免費報章，令免費報章在行內忽然備受「注目」，碰到行家總會問「如何應戰？」我的答案一貫是「做好自己！」大家與其關心免費報業市場進入戰國時代，繼而會否出現汰弱留強局面，我不如先為大家上一門認識免費報章的「通識課」。

先來自我介紹，加入am730晃眼已5年，5個寒暑有苦有樂，與很多人一樣，轉換工作機構總要一段時間適應，但自己那段適應期較一般人長，因為工作性質、崗位及需要兼顧的範疇與以前有異，更重要是為自己重新定位，在跌跌撞撞中摸索，過程中曾經碰過一鼻子灰，但找到了方向、調整了心態，便從工作中找到樂趣。

不少行家對免費報章的認知不多，無不「艷羨」免費報章「好做」，他們主觀認為免費報章假期多、版面小、早截稿、早收工……事實上這都只是一廂情願的想法；不少行家更以為免費報章的新聞內容都出自「炒台」，這全是誤解，我們堅持要做的必派人採訪，人手不足才被迫「炒台」，我們有我們的原則，我們也有我們的底線。

相對於收費報章，免費報章的編採部架構比較簡單，主要是沒有傳統編輯的崗位，所有記者要肩負起標題及排版，即記者要集「編採寫」於一身，工作自然繁重了，但自己排版的最大好處，是若稿件太長可即時自行刪文，毋須再經與傳統報章編輯翻來覆去的「角力」，減省繁瑣流程及不必要的摩擦，但「代價」是要等「走版」，印證了在免費報章「早收工」只是流言。

已有6年歷史的am730，在行內已建立起一定地位，但仍有人對這份報章懵然不知，一次向一名政界中人遞上名片，那人很認真看過名片後，一臉天真地問這是否電台？其反應令我啞然失笑，我不敢說那政界中人無知，但那孤陋寡聞的程度頗令人吃驚，可能有些人的眼底裡只有自己的世界。

忽然記起一件舊事，中聯辦某年組織一個傳媒內地考察團，我們不在被邀之列，我向中聯辦了解，對方推說名額有限，還附上一句：「你們不是主流媒體！」我沒有追問「主流媒體」與「非主流媒體」如何區別，因為明知不會得到答案，但換另一個角度，如果因為並非主流媒體而不在「被統戰」行列，也未嘗不是好事。

通脹太高了，傳媒加薪追不了

2011-11-17T08:58:00.000-08:00

莊曉陽　香港記者協會總幹事

【記聲2011年11月號】本年七月的通脹率達7.9%，創了十六年的新高，絕大部分記者本年的薪酬加幅只有3%至4%，加幅遠遠追不上通脹。即使個別傳媒機構的平均加幅超過7%，原因卻是記者薪酬普遍偏低，過半數有十年經驗的記者薪酬不及兩萬元，實際加薪金額不多。

與政府及大機構比，記者加薪的幅度更是望塵莫及，加薪幅度只有政府公務員的一半。公務員本年加薪的百分率是6.16%至7.24%，這是按政府的薪酬趨勢調查以香港過百間大企業的平均數而定。

雖然在免費資訊泛濫的互聯網年代，不少人指印刷傳媒已淪為「夕陽工業」，記者難指望有理想的薪酬加幅，但近期傳媒集團爭相出免費報，霸平台，爭取印刷媒介更多的廣告商機，顯示仍有出路。

再看看上市印刷傳媒公司近期公佈的業績，情況並不如想像中一面倒悲觀，除了壹傳媒(282)因台灣的電視業務錄得虧損，其餘印刷傳媒，例如星島集團(1105)、東方報業(18)的盈利算穩定，經濟日報(423)的盈利更大增八成。

至於《明報》的母公司世界華文媒體有限公司(685)本年三月至六月賺1億600萬，但旗下的香港及內地業務，除稅前利潤只是1300萬，而《明報》只是眾多業務的其中一項。

上市印刷傳媒公司也持有大量現金，東方報業集團傳接近有20億現金、壹傳媒和世界華文媒體有接近9億，經濟日報、南華早報(583)及星島集團則持有近4至近6億現金不等，由於上市印刷傳媒公司一般沒有借貸或借貸比率偏低，這反映它們的財務狀況健全。

部分電子傳媒的業績更佳，例如電視廣播(511)和持有香港寬頻的城市電訊(1137)的盈利也大幅上升。可惜坐擁巨額盈利，不代表公司的管理層與員工分享成果，每逢在加薪前吹淡風，「外圍經濟不明朗」、「明年經濟可能轉壞」、「經營環境依然艱難」，以調低員工對加薪的期望，已是某些機構慣常的做法。

不少傳媒機構已不在佈告欄貼出整體平均加薪幅度的通告，因為不同組別記者的平均加薪幅度也有差異，還是讓大家不知道好了。以某報為例，副刊記者的薪酬加幅比港聞記者低，因為副刊記者每天寫作的字數不及港聞記者。

但盈利減少和虧損，傳媒調低記者的薪酬加幅並不是明智之舉，需要承受留不住人才、新聞質素下降、打擊員工士氣的惡果。有電視台高層曾苦笑，他們每年都要流失一、兩打優秀記者給其他行業；《南華早報》近期流失大量記者，或多或少因為近年的凍薪及減花紅，而薪酬較低傳媒機構的記者，往往成為競爭對手挖角的目標。

即使因台灣電視台業務而錄得虧損的壹傳媒(282)，記者薪酬也有平均4%的加幅，其他傳媒機構絕對有空間加更多薪酬，沒有理讓加幅連通脹也追不上。香港經濟過去一年相當好，《記者之聲》希望傳媒機構明年的薪酬加幅，至少可以追得上通脹，讓記者分享應有的成果。

1 《明報》，2011年7月12日

傳媒	平均加薪幅度(%)
東方報業集團	5~6
蘋果日報	4
星島報業集團	3
明報	4至5
經濟日報	4
信報	5
新報	2
成報	按個別情況加薪
南華早報	凍薪
文匯報	3
大公報	5~11
都市日報	3
am730	7
無綫新聞	3
亞視新聞	只有部份員工獲加薪
有線新聞*	3
now新聞	只有部份員工獲加薪
商業電台	3~4
香港電台	6.16~7.24
新城電台	3
香港寛頻	8

資料來源：各大傳媒記者

*年中部分員工再獲加薪

警方要挫傳媒銳氣　我變成「企圖爆竊」

2011-11-16T09:03:00.000-08:00

曾愛盈

【記聲2011年11月號】「假如發生爆炸，記者抵達採訪現場，必定選擇站到最近可觀察情況，但不會被炸到的地點。」每個記者心中都有自己的目標與底線，不敢說所有同行想法和我一樣，但我確是如是想。

那天完成立法會大樓工程採訪，進入新政府總部，便是這想法作祟，關注曾特首這棟面子工程，是否不漏水不塌樓堅固挺拔。

我們三名記者不吝嗇一點腳力到新政府大樓門外仰望一番，然後問保安「可以進去嗎？」對方簡單說「可以」，然後叫我們登記訪客證。

「哦，原來可以的!」我們便直接登記訪客證，寫上公司名稱、姓名和身分證號碼，換來一張鮮橙色的訪客證掛在胸口，名正言順進入政府大樓逛。

我曾問過幾個腦筋正常的朋友，叫他們說說幻想中特首辦門外是什麼模樣，大家都覺未必有大炮飛彈，但總有幾名警員站崗吧。按記者的本能，既來之則安之，能夠為讀者預先看到多少情況、觀察到多少資料就寫多少。

探政府大樓堅實　誤墮迷宮

我心中大概的內容是「特首辦已入伙，門外有X名保安把守」之類，但故事教訓記者凡事不要理所當然。情況是，當我們踏出電梯，大樓內甚麼也沒有，指示牌也沒一個。我們三人在全無指示牌的迷宮中迷路近一小時，對於在所位置本已很迷糊，加上大樓收不到電話訊號，GPS也派不上用場，我們搞不清何地何方。

當我們在政府大樓層內上上下下穿梭，經過長廊來到另一座建築物，保安員開閘讓我們進入大堂，同樣沒有任何標示，猶記得特首辦大概在三樓，按三字，我們以疑狐的心情踏出電梯，看見一道落地玻璃門，剛巧一名女士推門出來，撐著門示意我們進去，我禮貌地微笑說謝謝。進去了才赫然發現站在辦首辦主任房間門口。更意外的是，後來發現罪名變成「企圖爆竊」。

朋友說，這橋段很像請君入甕，我想一想覺得像空城計。動漫化的表達，是擺一個門戶大開的空城，三名記者不明所以就走進去，突然千軍萬馬從旁殺出，這時畫面閃過禿鷹的奸笑：「呢班記者都惡得耐喇，嘻嘻，今次仲捉你唔到﹗」

事後看警方新聞稿，說是因三人出現三種身份而覺可疑。老實說，若非當事人，只看警方新聞稿，我也會誤以為自己刻意準備好假證，刻意冒充公職人士招搖撞騙，真是個壞蛋！

但事實卻不是這樣，當我們發現登記進入的証件，無法「嘟」卡離開玻璃門，緊張兮兮趕來的警察連珠炮發問我們身份，才弄得氣氛緊張萬分，大家七咀八舌解釋，同伴有人指著心口搶眼的訪客證，隨即又出示記者證，事實也無必要隱瞞，記者登記了訪客證，路路通行，然後迷路了，雖然丟臉，也沒必要冒充他人，令光明正大變成偷雞摸鼠。當時警察，根本沒有誤會過我們是職員。

果然，警方這個「企圖爆竊」聲明，令一些電子媒體和花生友受誤導，矛頭指向記者，說什麼「放蛇」不對，又冒充職員，又「懷疑持假證」!!!

執法原來不講證據

但警方發聲明時，我們三名記者卻被扣留至三更半夜，不准致電公司解釋，欲辯無從。事件教訓我，警方語焉不詳的聲明很具誤導性。扣留期間和阿Sir吹水，當時大家都覺「很小事」，更透露是「有人」下令挫一挫記者的氣焰。這本是安撫的話，我卻聽著心寒，原來警方執法不是講證據，還有「恐嚇」目的。

扣留我的阿Sir很客氣，我不覺自己受了委屈，受委屈的是傳媒行業。對我個人只損失7小時，動氣也覺太小氣，無論任何環境，記者也得維持專業冷靜。最有力的控訴，就持平客觀地把事實一字一句寫出來。事件令我對警方的看法有新啟發，對於之後出現的「黑影論」，更不太驚訝，因為在拘留期間在鐵窗臭格內公開如廁的經歷，已讓我初窺到警權正漸漸膨脹張牙舞爪，而那只是序幕。

到今天，警方踐踏新聞自由的劣跡斑斑，我想起被扣留時平靜的心聲，在香港，「我不信警察，但我信法律」。幸好，記者現在還可以相信律法保障新聞自由，否則我已不知什麼還可信了。

記者宵夜有乜好去處

2011-11-16T05:04:00.000-08:00

陳凱迎

【記聲2011年11月號】記者食無定時，正餐時間經常順延，下午茶當作午餐，放工宵夜其實是晚餐。有天，跟同事商量到哪裡吃宵夜，同事說要求不多，最重要是「收得夜」；這個選擇宵夜地點的重要條件，也許幾十年來都無改變。

入行30年、由前線做到採主到近年於樹仁大學執起教鞭的岑倚蘭（一般行家會叫她「岑倚」）表示，宵夜對上一輩記者來說，是盛行一時的文化，一星期至少有三晚宵夜，「有時做嘢好辛苦，宵夜食好啲當係獎勵自己，係一種釋放壓力嘅方法。」

上代愛打邊爐

岑倚蘭說前一代記者愛打邊爐

岑倚說，他們那時最喜歡打邊爐，「如果第二日唔駛返工，會打到天昏地暗，四點幾先返屋企」，又會到銅鑼灣「太湖」吃小菜、到灣仔「新光」打冷，或到蘭桂坊摸摸酒杯底，每次只要有六個同事或行家便成行。到後來升職加薪，大家轉戰日本餐廳，享受魚生壽司。

遇有行家生日或大時大節，前輩們又會到卡啦OK唱通宵，個個變成「超級巨星」；岑倚笑言，最瘋狂的一次，是放工後到通宵營業的超市買料，駕車到石澳燒野食，「兩點幾先起到爐開始燒！」

這一代記者，邊爐偶爾還是會打，但怕肥更重要，又有部分行家晚飯時間抵不住肚餓，吃了晚餐才來，對肥牛或象拔蚌都耍手擰頭；要迎合各位餓鬼和飽鬼的意願，café或許是最佳選擇。
這代鍾情Cafe

談到café，離不開旺角和銅鑼灣，其中更有些店是由前行家或現任行家經營，也因此吸引不少記者捧場，位於旺角的TC2 café便是其一。

新一代記者轉戰Cafe 喝酒吹水

TC2 café老板岑仔曾於商台、TVB和有線電視等任職，三年多前離開傳媒，轉投飲食界發展。岑仔說，他還在當記者時，放工多數會與同事落酒吧飲酒，「例如舊陣時返cable，尖沙咀個公司station附近好多酒吧，會成日去。」當時宵夜同行，也以電子傳媒的為主：「電子行家同報紙行家多數會分開玩，除非大家係舊同學。」

如今岑仔當上老板，到TC2幫襯的電子與文字記者，依舊是分開兩批，但無論來自哪種媒體，現一代記者聚會時所談的話題與上一代卻大同小異。「有時我會側耳聽到，來來去去嘅話題都係講吓老細，有時會討論同一單assignment，自己同行家嘅採訪技巧有咩唔同，有時甚至會講到當時最熱門嘅社會政策，尤其係一班熟客仔嘅政治行家。」例如前陣子，亞視報道江澤民死訊 ( 已證實誤報 )更放下老板身份，參與記者們的討論。

兩代記者還有一個共通點，就是聚會往往都要很晚才到齊人，「佢哋（指記者）通常唔會一次過嚟晒，訂位時最好就講聲係行家，我哋可以易啲安排坐位。」所以行家們下次幫襯，最好先「表明身份」，隨時還可因此取得折頭。

可以吃得很健康

食宵夜容易與肥胖連繫，但營養師黃凱詩表示，其實夜食飯本身對體重影響不大，最重要是每日所攝取的熱量有否多於所需，「如果你整個生理時鐘都延遲咗，宵夜只係你一日三餐入面嘅最後一餐，全日卡路里攝取量又冇超標，其實問題不大。」她以一個120磅的成年人為例，每日卡路里攝取量上限為1500千卡，只要每日超標500千卡，一星期便可增重一磅。

黃凱詩說，以往也曾有記者找她幫忙減肥，她認為多數記者既然每天起床時已到達中午，可如常先吃午飯，到下午3至4時，可選擇一個早餐份量的食物作下午茶，例如一杯咖啡配一份三文治；晚上如果因為趕稿不能吃晚餐，黃凱詩建議先用餅乾零食「頂肚」，到放工時再以宵夜代替晚餐，「咁宵夜就唔會係額外嘅一餐。」

吃宵夜當然也要吃得健康，對於愛打邊爐的記者，黃凱詩建議最好選擇清湯或皮蛋芫茜，「麻辣或沙嗲都太油，要盡量避免。」食物方面，牛肉可以繼續點，「但就要揀新鮮牛肉，唔駛要咁多雪花（即肥膏）」，海鮮和丸類也是健康之選。

當宵夜場地轉到café，大家難免會吃薯條和雞翼，唯有慎選飲品，例如可選擇水果茶或花茶，「好多人都以為果汁係健康，但其實一杯果汁都有140千卡卡路里，等如一杯汽水。」黃凱詩說。

如果是吃糖水，記者們則可選擇水果涼粉或蕃薯糖水，「當然涼粉唔可以加太多糖水，蕃薯就可以食埋，因為本身都係高纖食物」，一碗芝麻糊的熱量反而高達300至400千卡，相等如兩碗白飯，怕肥就要可免則免。

即使宵夜只是你的晚飯，但吃飽就睡仍然有損健康，過往已有研究顯示，宵夜和胃酸倒流息息相關，另會造成消化不良，故記者們緊記，宵夜也不要吃得太晚。

多位記者負笈充電

2011-11-16T01:04:00.000-08:00

【記聲2011年11月號】每年都有不少記者退下新聞火線去充電進修。有線電視記者古治雄及《信報》政治組記者畢礎暉獲得英國外交部的志奮領獎學金，十月起於英國約克大學及錫菲爾大學修讀政治哲學碩士及國際政治傳播碩士課程。

人稱古Sir的古治雄愛讀書。古Sir說已有心理準備未來一年，天天留在圖書館寒窗苦讀，抗拒假期去外國旅行及開派對的誘惑。畢礎輝則說，希望畢業後從事政治相關的工作。

《南華早報》記者伍育行也負笈英倫進修，她取得太古的獎學金，在牛津大學的聖安東尼學院修讀一年歷史學碩士課程。她希望用這一年時間研究香港歷史，特別是《南華早報》的歷史。

香港電台記者蔡德蕙則在本地進修，於中文大學修讀文化管理碩士一年課程。近年有不少記者修讀這個課程，她說，開學迎新已碰到鳳鳳衛視廣東話台記者余展豪及前亞洲電視記者陳佩琳，兩人都以兼讀方式進修。

《記者之聲》祝各位學有所成！

台灣記協雪中送炭　支持黑衫行動

2011-11-15T11:05:00.000-08:00

【記聲2011年11月號】為了抗議副總理李克強訪港期間，警方對新聞自由的種種打壓，記協於九月十二日發起「黑衣行動」。台灣新聞記者協會也響應記協行動，他們也於同一天在Facebook展開「黑衣行動」，呼籲台灣的記者同業穿上黑衣，手持支持香港新聞自由的標語，自拍一張照片，然後上傳到台灣記者協會的Facebook專頁，隔海支援香港的記者。

行動得到台灣記者的支持，短短幾天已有數十名台灣記者響應。有台灣記者覺得香港的記者團結，短短三兩天已可以召集三百名記者參與遊行，十分難得。台灣記協關心香港情況，他們向香港記協表示，若日後有需要串連活動，他們很樂意一起配合！

凌樹輝喜愛兒渡海奪冠

2011-11-15T09:05:00.000-08:00

【記聲2011年11月號】維港渡海泳今年復辦，港隊成員凌天宇力壓群雄，以20分34.4秒奪冠。大家可能不知道，十八歲的凌天宇，父親原來是大家的同業──《蘋果日報》攝影記者凌樹輝！
凌樹輝說，天宇四、五歲開始學游泳，「細佬仔乜都會玩，唔係踢波就游水」，他沒有特別培養天宇習泳，後來看到天宇有天份，他自己又喜歡游泳，便順其自然讓他一直游。他謙稱，沒有做甚麼特別培養天宇，唯一功勞可能是小時候帶他到游泳池吧。

凌家一門出兩傑，天宇的弟弟、十三歲的天朗也是游泳健將。小時候跟哥哥一起游泳的天朗，也在渡海泳的男子團體組取得第四名！

Freebies creating knowledge gap in society

2011-11-14T11:54:00.000-08:00

Gillian Yau, Phyllis Tsang

[Nov 2011 - The Journalist] A war of the freebies has erupted. It came with the launch of Next Media's Sharp Daily in mid-September. There are now five Chinese and one English tabloids.

In 2002 there was only one free newspaper – Metro. In 2005 came HK Headline and am730. But the competition between them was not as serious as expected. It was not until three months ago, when Sky Post and Sharp Daily arrived, that the media industry began to see threats to paid newspapers.

Having six free newspapers in town is a record among cities. The circulation of free papers has reached 3 million while the paid newspaper’s combined circulation is 1 million. That means every two person in Hong Kong read one newspaper. It is a relatively high ratio compared with other countries. But does this mean the community benefits from this apparently stronger fourth estate?

Freebie readers do not have the same expectations as those who pay for their daily newspapers. Readers of paid newspapers generally look for content that fits in with their reading habits and interests. However, readers of free papers have no such expectations and do not complain much because they do not have to pay for anything. This has created a huge “readership” and a considerable amount of income from advertising.

Professor Clement So of the School of Journalism and Communication at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, has been following the development of the newspaper market over the past few years. He pointed out that some free newspapers were launched by paid newspaper enterprises merely for the sake of market share. He said Sing Tao Group's HK Headline, Hong Kong Economic Times' Sky Post and Next Media's Sharp Daily fell into this category.

Knowledge gap created

Thus free dailies like Metro and which have no back up of paid newspapers within their own stables are going to face more uncertainties in coming years, Prof So said. More changes within the newspaper industry can also be expected in coming years, Prof So added. But these changes will affect quantity rather than quality, though other changes were also in the offing.

While some media professionals are worried about the future of the industry, the influence of these freebies on society is generally ignored. Although the freebies circulate widely their role in societal change is not considered significant. It is not common for any of these freebies to run exclusive stories. Investigative reporting is totally unknown. These free newspapers solely provide basic information. There are some distinctive columns in several free newspapers, but they merely provide opinions. The front pages of these tabloids are usually taken up by advertisements.

The emergence of the free tabloid is usually understated. But a knowledge gap has formed inside our society because of their popularity, says Prof So. Those who did not read newspapers before have become readers of free newspapers which offer no insight other than simple reporting. Readers of paid newspapers, on the other hand, have reports with depth and analysis. The consequence is that the gap between readers of two different kinds of newspapers has widened. The number of newspaper readers has increased, but the understanding level of news and current affairs has become extremely divided.

The situation in other parts of the world is similar. Professor So said there might be differences in terms of style between free newspapers, but all of them are meant for the general population. It is the same in Europe. He expects there will be changes in the editorial position of some free newspapers in coming years, but they are not going to take over the market share of paid newspapers.

(Translated by Gillian Yau )

All-in-one approach to journalism

2011-11-14T07:56:00.000-08:00

Ken Lui, Phyllis Tsang

[Nov 2011 - The Journalist] High-circulation of free newspapers does not mean better job opportunities for journalists. Those already on the job simply do more, with reporters doubling as editors or even doing the art work. As Sharp Daily and HK Headline relies on content provided by Apple Daily and Sing Tao Daily – their respective “parents” – this also changes the work routine of reporters on paid-for newspapers.

Sharp Daily (circulation: 900,000) has a 30-man team, all previously reporters or editors on Apple Daily. They are responsible for rewriting news content provided by Apple Daily. Its front page is usually off-stone just after 10pm. This early schedule is to cope with the big jump in printing and to allow later editions to cope with new developments in major news events, according to Cheung Kim-hung, the editor-in-chief.

At HK Hadline early deadline is the norm for the staff. All stories must be ready by 6pm. It has over 140 pages. It is difficult to get every detail correct with such a rushed schedule. Even when the first edition has rolled off the editorial team's work is not over. Reporters have to start work for the second edition if there is a major news event.

The workload on free and paid newspaper is about the same, according to Siu Sai-woo, editor-in-chief of HK Headline. However, reporters must keep important news items to a few hundred words while those on sister paper Sing Tao Daily have much greater leeway. Both papers share the same sources for stories, but some reporters of HK Headline have occasionally to do their own reporting. The reporters have to write three stories, averaging 300 to 500 words each.

Accuracy remains a ''must''

Journalists on am730, are also responsible for post-production duties as well. Lo Kwok-lun, the editor-in-chief, says his reporters must be able to multi-task, meaning they have to report, edit, and do layout. Courses on computer software are provided for all new staff. Instead of beat reporting as in other paid newspapers, reporters at are responsible for international news, sports and even entertainment news.

Being the first free newspaper in town, Metro Daily has a circulation of 400,000 every week day. The journalists not only have to be responsible for reporting the news in short, precise articles, they also have to work on in-depth features, according to Leung Kam-hung, deputy editor of the Metro Daily. “There is no difference between free newspapers and paid newspapers in terms of accuracy,” said Leung.

The introduction of freebies have affected the pattern of news reporting of paid newspapers. Cheung Kin-hung, editor-in-chief of Apple Daily told The Journalist that editorial judgement of Apple Daily would have the readers ofSharp Daily in mind as well. “Sharp Daily is a paper with a million readers target. That means more consumer news and down-to-earth topics will be considered by the news team of Apple Daily,” said Cheung. He added that reporters of Apple Daily are going to be content providers for various new units of the Next Group, using different mediums including animation.

In the past it was common for journalists to shoot on the spot with their cameras. Now they have to use the iphone and send it online instantly. There is also the video footage and photos for Apple Daily and Sharp Daily. Cheung pointed to the lay-off at HSBC as an example, “The business desk at Apple Daily got the news that HSBC was going to have a large lay-off. The news-desk had to decide whether to to report via online instant news. Even if it is only 2 hours ahead of the announcement, we still have to do it,” said Cheung.

Reporters can still excel

The average staff size of a free newspaper is about 30 people on the editorial team. Lo Kwok-lun, editor-in-chief of the said that there are not many promotion opportunities in such a small unit. Some reporters moved to paid newspapers or changed careers. Some have remained on which was launched a few years ago. Though small it has relatively more variety in terms of editorial work, including in-depth features or personality profiles, said Lo. However, going out to get news is a rare exercise for journalists of free newspapers. Instead of going out to report and interviewing people, journalists of free papers mostly sit in the office and watch TV news. “Leave the TV reporters to ask the questions. It will be more efficient to spend time reading reports for further analysis,” said Lo.

Though there are fewer opportunities for reporters on free dailies, they can still excel because of the high-circulation of free dailies, said Siu Sai-woo, editor-in-chief of HK Headline.

(Translated by Gillian Yau )

Freebies headed for the mainstream

2011-11-13T07:59:00.000-08:00

Vivian Tam

[Nov 2011 - The Journalist] With the newly-launched Sharp Daily there are now six free daily newspapers in Hong Kong. That's a total of about 3 million copies distributed every day, or about three times the number of regular newspapers sold. The Chief Executive Officer of advertising company Group M, Tsang Kam Keung, believes freebies will continue to advance.

We put a series of questions to him.

Q: What did your clients think of the free daily when it was first introduced in Hong Kong?

A: They were worried about the quality of free daily and were not sure if it would succeed. But the reaction has been quite positive since and my clients have found that people do read them. When we advise them on how to make use of the media, we tell them to look at readership and quality of readers. Whether a paper is free or not is not the key issue.

Q: What is the readership of a free tabloid?

A: These free tabloids are mainly distributed at MTR stations, so most of the readers are working people. Some freebies have made their way to residential areas, reaching out to different types of readers. The most popular freebies are Headline Daily, <am 7.30> and Metro News. So we usually recommend our clients to place ads in these three free dailies plus Oriental Daily and Apple Daily. These five papers can reach out to nearly all types of newspaper readers. Most clients have adopted this practice when placing ads in the print media, accounting for 60 to 70 per cent of print advertising. Clients who want to reach out to high-end readers (executives or those at managerial level) put ads in Hong Kong Economic Journal,Hong Kong Economic Times and the South China Morning Post. Our experience tells us that it is more cost effective to place ads in free dailies.

Q: Hong Kong Economic Times’s Skypost, is quite new. How is it doing in the market?

A: Frankly I don’t find Skypost very appealing. But our internal survey found Skypost readership to be higher than the traditional paid newspapers. I am quite surprised at the findings. It may be because readers will read it anyway as long as it is free.

Q: What is the situation like now that Sharp Daily has joined the competition?

A: Sharp Daily is speeding up the decline of traditional paid newspapers, as Apple Daily readers also switching to Sharp Daily. Before that leaders who shared Apple Daily’s political viewpoint and preferred sensational stories basically could not find a substitute in the free daily market. But Sharp Daily now serves as the perfect substitute for Apple Daily which has a readership profile that is quite similar toOriental Daily. So I believe Sharp Daily is capable of fighting for ads which originally went to these two newspapers.

Q: But the experience in Taiwan was that Sharp Daily does not affect the circulation of Apple Daily.

A: Taiwan is different. Sharp Daily controls the distribution network, but the paper has failed to reach people in remote villages. Sharp Daily in Hong Kong, however, is determined to launch a war againstHeadline Daily by producing half a million copies a day. But it seems Sharp Daily is eating into Applemore aggressively in Hong Kong than in Taiwan.

Q: Oriental Daily is rumoured to be planning a free daily as well.

A: If it’s true then it will really speed up the death of traditional newspapers. The market in the future probably will be made up of 70 per cent of free daily readers and 30 per cent of readers who look for quality news such as the Hong Kong Economic Journal, Hong Kong Economic Daily and the South China Morning Post. There will be little room for paid newspapers to survive. Paid newspaper can only focus more on business news to build up its reputation and image to make its way to school and households. Freebies have adopted this strategy too, as Headline Daily, AM 730 and Metro News have shown. They don’t use sensational pictures.

Q: What is the profile of traditional paid newspaper readership? Are they attractive to advertisers?

A: The content of the traditional newspaper is much richer. The readership is much older and prefers reading in-depth analysis and reports. They might be retirees or have affluent backgrounds. But they don't appeal to advertisers, as they are getting old and the number of readers keeps declining as death takes its toll.

Q: Will the influx of free dailies in the market affect the effectiveness of ads?

A: About 30 per cent of expenditure on advertising go to free dailies. There is still room for free dailies to grab a bigger market share, and they will first take ads away from traditional newspapers. There is also competition among freebies, as it takes time for the 30 per cent to go up to, say, 80 per cent. Some free dailies might not be able to survive the competition. Skypost, for example, is not doing very well. Sharp Daily, might speed up the death of Skypost. But in the long run, I think, the Hong Kong market can accommodate four to five free dailies with a distribution of 3 million. The reading habit will change, too, and readers will pick up a few free dailies and only read the columns they like.

Q: Why is the freebie successful?

A: Right time, right place and right people. Readers prefer reading short stories. It is perfect to finish reading a newspaper in just about 20 minutes. The free daily satisfies this need. Also, the internet has changed reading habits. By now people have also become used to reading free dailies.

Q: Which newspapers, in your view, are in danger of being kicked out of the market?

A: All traditional newspapers, especially those which are not the top two sellers. Hong Kong Daily News, Sing Pao, The Sun, Ming Pao…they are all in danger. Traditional newspapers have to woo affluent readers in order to survive and only newspapers that focus on business news can make it or the major titles like Oriental Dailyand Apple Daily. But once they both introduce free dailies, I doubt the rest can survive much longer.

(Translated by Senga Lam)

The stark share-out of the market currently, in Tsang Kam Keung's estimation, is as follows:

Market share of the advertising sector

	Ads Turnover	Market share per centage(4 billion）
Traditional Newspapers	2.8 billion	70%
Headline Daily	600 million	15%
AM730	300 million	7.5%
Metro News	300 million	7.5%

＊Television(30%) is the biggest ads market, followed by newspaper (25%=4 billion), outdoor ad(20%), magazine(15%), internet(10%).　　

Price list of a full page ad

	Full page ad
South China Morning Post	100,000
Oriental Daily/Apple Daily	100,000
Hong Kong Economic Times	80,000-100,000
Ming Pao	50,000-60,000
Headline Daily/Singtao Daily	40,000-50,000
/ Metro News	20,000-25,000

Sharp Daily in Taiwan launched in double-quick time

2011-11-12T12:01:00.000-08:00

Vivian Tam

[Nov 2011 - The Journalist] An interview with Daisy Li. Former News Director of Sharp Daily, Taiwan .

Q: How did Sharp Daily come to life in Taiwan?

A: Jimmy Lai Chi Ying did not support the idea of having a free daily in Hong Kong years ago. “People will not cherish it if it is free. They will only cherish something that they have to pay for,” Mr Lai once said. What he meant was it was better to focus on producing quality paid paper than producing free daily with no gimmicks. But he did not have any strong opinion about Taiwan.

In 2006, there was a bid for a free daily franchise in Taiwan, and the advertisement department of Apple Daily Taiwan thought it might be a new platform for advertising. So Ip Yut Kin, Chief Executive Officer-in print Media of Next Media Ltd proposed to Mr Jimmy Lai and a decision was made. That was how we decided on the Sharp Daily in Taiwan. (Note: UPaper owned by United Daily News won the franchise and Sharp Daily Taiwan was distributed outside Metro Taipei Stations)

Q: It took only one month to launch Sharp Daily. (mid-September 2006 – Oct 23 2006) How could it be achieved in such a short time?

A: The working culture of our company is to push the product to the market first and let the market test the product. Once we decided to launch Sharp Daily, I quickly turned a research department at Apple Daily Taiwan, which was originally set up to assist our colleagues to conduct investigative reporting, into a team of writers for Sharp Daily Taiwan. About four to five editors from Apple Daily Taiwan were also deployed toSharp Daily plus seven others from the art and design department. Reporters of the feature section also contribute stories to Sharp Daily. We basically did not hire extra hands to run the new daily.

Q: The contents of Sharp Daily basically is taken from Apple Daily Taiwan. Why doesn't the freebie do its own reporting?

A: This is a very “natural” practice. It is the best way to keep down the operations costs and maximize profits.

Q: How does Sharp Daily select materials from Apple Daily?

A: Most Metro Taipei passengers are working people and students. Content relating to daily life is the most attractive. Price war between restaurants offering cheap breakfast in Taipei, for example, is the kind of story that appeals to them. Breaking news about an accident in a village, to the contrary, is not their cup of tea.

Q: What is the layout and design strategy?

A： The average traveling time of a metro journey is around 20 minutes. We don’t expect our readers to keep our paper, so the reading time must be short. Based on these considerations, the front page story should not have more than 400 words and we have a 200 word limit for stories in the inside pages. We stress visual effect, for example, by using photos and designed pictures in series and we use more picture stories to report breaking news. The font size is bigger and spacing is wider to make reading in a train more pleasurable.

Q: Does Sharp Daily impact on Apple Daily's circulation in Taiwan?

A： We have not seen any significant drop in the circulation of Apple Daily in Taiwan since the introduction of Sharp Daily. I believe the free daily has reached out to people who previously did not buy any newspaper at all, like secondary school students. The parents of these students are Apple Daily readers so the circulation has remained steady.

Q: Is there any division of labour between Sharp Daily and Apple Daily in Taiwan?

A: Apple Daily must share their exclusive stories with Sharp Daily so the front pages of the two papers might be the same sometimes. But when reviewing performance on how the two papers handle the same story, Sharp Daily might have a better headline at times and that would put pressure on Apple Daily to do better. I think the number of newspapers readers will surely go down in the future. We have to woo our readers with good quality stories. Free dailies should not be blamed for the decline in the circulation of paid newspapers.

Q: Sharp Daily in Hong Kong has launched an audio version, will you follow suit in Taiwan?

A: Our selling point is introducing a Mandarin version and a Taiwanese version. Adopting multi-media in our production is our future development direction and it will be very cost effective.

Q: How do you decide on the number pages each day?

A: It really depends on how many ads we have for each page. Our principle is to strike a good balance between the amount of ads and new stories.

(Note: On a Friday in early September, Sharp Daily Taiwan had 60 pages, half of them filled by ads.)

Q: What are the challenges confronting Sharp Daily in Hong Kong and Taiwan?

A: It’s a tough battle in Hong Kong! When Sharp Daily was launched in Taiwan there was only one free daily on the market. But there are already five in Hong Kong, when Sharp Daily arrived in the Hong Kong. Some property developers in Hong Kong have banned distribution of free dailies in residential areas. We don’t have this problem in Taiwan. The cost of paper, printing, distribution and human resources in Hong Kong is higher than in Taiwan.

Q: Free dailies usually need less human resources in the editorial department, is there any future for journalists?

A: Multimedia is the future for journalism. There will be no pure news writers or news photographers. Journalists need to learn how to use tools to cover and present stories. If a journalist knows how to present a story by adopting multimedia approach, he or she for sure will not be jobless.

Li Yuet-wah, the former News Director of Sharp Daily Taiwan is now the Online News Director of Apple Daily Taiwan

(Translated by Senga Lam)

Comparison between Sharp Daily in Hong Kong and Taiwan

	Taiwan	Hong Kong
Sharp Daily distribution	180,000	900,000 ~ 1,000,000
Apple Daily circulation	480,000 (No1 circulation in Taipei )	260,000 (Top 2 in Hong Kong )
Free Daily	Sharp Daily Taiwan (the reading rate of university students is 60 % )United Daily News UPaper (Daily distribution of 80,000, 40 % of the readers are university students)＊	Headline Daily (800,000 daily distribution) (360,000)Metro News (300,000)Skypost (500,000)The Standard (220,000)

*Ming Chuan University 2010 survey, respondents are journalism major students

Into a new dimension with AM730

2011-11-08T09:45:00.000-08:00

Kusche Cheng, am730 reporter

[Nov 2011 - The Journalist] Two newspaper companies launched their own free newspapers recently, and suddenly freebies are the centre of attention in the media industry. When I meet reporters from other companies, I am invariably asked: “How are you going to fight this battle?” My usual reply is: “We’ll just do our best!”

Before getting too concerned about whether freebies are entering the “Period of the Warring States”, and whether the weaker papers are going to be eliminated soon, let me share my views about what free newspapers really are all about.

I have been working in one of them, AM730, for 5 years. There have been happy moments in these years, but there were also tears. A major challenge for me when I first got into it was not only adapting to a new environment, but that my adaption period was exceptionally long. It was because the nature of my new job, new post and the things that I had to take care of were all very different from the previous job. It was also a time when I needed to find a new direction and orientation in my career. I had made mistakes, explored different things, and fortunately, when I eventually found my new direction, and had adjusted to the right attitude towards work, I started to love my job.

Many of my reporter friends are envious of how “comfortable” our work is in a free newspaper. But I think that is only based on wrong impressions. These friends of mine usually think that reporters like us have more day-offs, less work to do, meet deadlines earlier every night and, therefore, we go home earlier. But none of this is true. There are also reporters who think that almost all the contents of a free newspaper come from copying instant news websites and other electronic media. This is a common misunderstanding, too! In fact, we insist on assigning reporters to cover major news events, and we copy materials from the electronic media only when we run out of reporters and have no other choice. This is a fundamental principle we hold on to.

While there are misunderstandings, it is true that unlike traditional papers, the newsroom of a free paper has a simpler structure. It is mainly because we do not have traditional editors, and all our reporters provide the headings for their stories and even lay out the pages themselves, thus combining reporting, editing and laying out. This means we have a heavier workload, and we also have to stay longer in the office to check and see off the final proofs. A heavy workload is bad, but the good thing about working in such a newsroom is that we can edit and even shorten our articles the way we like to. Unlike the traditional papers, we never have to “struggle” with the editors about how the stories are edited because we do the editing ourselves. That's put paid to all unnecessary squabbles among colleagues.

AM730 is now 6 years old. It has established its own niche in the industry. Yet there are still people who remain ignorant of our existence. I once met a local politician who, after seriously “examining” my card, asked me if we were a radio station. I was deeply shocked by this and, although I dare not say that he is ignorant, I think it really shows that there are people who live in their own little world.

Talking about ignorance, there was also an occasion when the LOCPG (Liaison Office of the Central People’s Government in the Hong Kong SAR) organized a study tour to mainland China for Hong Kong reporters, but did not invite AM730. Wondering why not, I called the LOCPG to ask. I was again shocked when they told me the reason was because they did not consider us to be a “mainstream media”. I did not ask how the LOCPG differentiated between non-mainstream and mainstream, because I knew there would not be an answer. At that time, I had thought that it was bad to be classed as non-mainstream, but who knows? If that means we do not need to be put on the Communists’ so-called “United Front”, being non-mainstream may be a bonus after all.

.(Translated by Tony Cheung )

Media pay hikes trailing inflation

2011-11-07T11:45:00.000-08:00

Chong Hiu Yeung, HKJA General Secretary

[Nov 2011 - The Journalist] Inflation in July hit 7.9%, a record high in 16 years. But salary hikes for most journalists were in the 3-4% range. The difference between the two is just too stark.

Such incremental rates hardly catch up with the inflation rate.

At some media organisations increments averaged more than 7%. But that is only because the wage levels are abysmally low. Half of the journalists with 10 years' experience earn less than HK$20,000 a month. So the actual increments do not amount to much.

The increases also lag far behind those of the civil service and large-size companies. They represent only half of the government increases which range between 6.16% to 7.24%. This rate is determined by the Pay Trend Survey, which is based on the average increase rate of more than 100 local large-sized enterprises.

With the flood of information in this internet era, the print media is usually described as a “sunset industry”. Reporters cannot expect any decent salary increments. However, it seems that there is still some hope as more media organizations have entered the free newspaper market to fight for a bigger market share and more advertising opportunities for the print media.

The situation does not appear that bad when we look at the performances of listed print media companies. Except for Next Media (282) which recorded a loss because of its Taiwan television business, others such as Sing Tao (1105) and Oriental Press (18) have stable profit margins. The profit of HKET Holdings (423) even soared 80%.

Media Chinese (685), the parent company of Ming Pao, earned 106 million from March to June this year. However, profits before tax was only $13 million from both local and Mainland earnings. Ming Pao is only of its many local businesses.

Listed print media companies have a huge amount of cash. Oriental Press is estimated to have $2 billion cash in hand, Next Media and Media Chinese have about 0.9 billion. HKET Holdings, SCMP Group (583) and Sing Tao are holding 0.4-0.6 billion cashi. Since listed printed media companies generally do not have borrowing or the debit rate is low, their financial status is regarded as healthy.

Results of some electronic media are even better. For example, profits at TVB (511) and City Telecom (1137) soared. Unfortunately huge profits do not mean any sharing with the staff. It is a normal practice in some media organizations to lower the staffs’ expectations by claiming “unstable external economic environment”, “the economy next year might be turning bad” and “the business environment is still difficult”.

Many media organizations do not announce the average rate of salary increment on the notice board anymore since the average increase rate for different kinds of journalists is not the same. For example, an increment rate for a supplement reporter of a particular newspaper is lower than Hong Kong daily news reporter because supplement reporters write less than a Hong Kong daily news reporter per day.

But it is not prudent to lower journalists’ salary increment due because of deficits or profit reductions. Media companies need to keep in mind the consequences of losing talented staff, decline in quality of news and newsroom morale. A management executive at a TV station once said with a bitter smile that he lost one to two dozen outstanding journalists to other industries every year. SCMP has lost a lot of reporters in recent times probably because it cut the bonus and froze salaries in recent years. Journalists with low salary often become the poaching targets of competitors.

At Next Media which has recorded a loss because of its Taiwan TV business, the average increments still reached 4%. Other media organizations definitely can afford higher increments. It is not reasonable that the increments cannot match inflation. The economy of Hong Kong was very good last year. The Journalist hopesthe increment rate of media organizations can at least match inflation so journalists can share in the fruits of our economic growth.

i 12 July 2011, Ming Pao

Forced to urinate in the open...behind bars

2011-11-06T09:08:00.000-08:00

Emily Tsang, Ming Pao Reporter

[Nov 2011 - The Journalist] Imagine...there's been a huge explosion. And I'm sent to cover it.

I tell myself I will get as close as possible to the spot where it all went up. Without getting myself hurt, of course.

I can't say this is what every reporter has to do. It's just what I believe I must do.

This gives you some idea of the kind of reporter I am...the reporter who went into the new central government complex at Tamar after covering the Legislative Council proceedings in part of this new structure.

I wanted to see if the Chief Executive's face-saving project had any leakages, any shoddiness to it.

Two other reporters and myself walked all the way over to the new headquarters to look at this new complex.

"Can we go in?" We asked a security guard.

"Yes."

We were told to register for visitor passes.

And so we wrote down the names of our media companies, our names and ID card numbers, put the bright orange passes on our chests and walked straight into the government headquarters.

With the full approval of its guardians and protectors.

Lady held open the door for us

I once asked a few friends to imagine what the outside of the Chief Executive's Office would look like.

They didn't expect there to be missiles or cannons. But there would be a couple of police officers standing guard outside.

By instinct we just wanted to see as much as we could, and report what we had seen through out sneak-peek at this centre of power.

Since Donald Tsang, Chief Executive, had already moved in, I was looking for police officers outside his workplace. How wrong I was to think that that has to be the case.

When we stepped out of the lift, there was nothing. No one. Not even direction signs.

The three of us walked around what proved to be a maze, for nearly an hour. Lost, dazed, we couldn't even get reception on our mobile phones. Even the GPS couldn't tell us where we were.

We walked up and down the headquarters, reaching another structure after going through a long corridor.

Security personnel opened a gate to let us into a hall. Again, no signs whatsoever.

We entered a lift, pressed button three, with faint memories that the CE's Office is on the third floor. A glass door was what we saw when we cautiously stepped out of the elevator.

And a lady just coming out in the opposite direction, held the door for us. I smiled and said “Thank you”. So we walked in.

We didn't know we were already standing right outside the office of Hong Kong's leader.

“Knock the media for its arrogance”

It was simply stunning to find out shortly that we were now about to commit "attempted burglary".

This was all very surreal. It was as if we had entered an “empty city” in which all its gates opened automatically as we approached them. Until we were ambushed. As the doors finally closed on us, an eagle appears on the wall to say: “Aha! We've finally got you! You, reporters have been so arrogant for such a long time...”

The police statement claimed that we were arrested because we had acted suspiciously by showing three different identities!

If I was not the one directly involved, I would – on reading the police statement – have believed that those arrested had prepared fake identifications. And how evil we were to have intentionally disguised ourselves as public officials. What trickery!

But that's not how it was. The passes that we had been issued with couldn't open the glass doors to let us out. The policemen on the other side dashed over.

They bombarded us with questions, demanded to know who we were. In this tense, chaotic situation, we explained ourselves, interrupting each other.

One of us pointed to the visitor badge on the chest, and then quickly brought out a press ID. Indeed there was nothing to hide, we had registered as visitors, and was given the green light to walk around.

We got lost, and though it was a bit of a shame, there was nothing for us to hide. More importantly, no police officer at the scene had mistaken us as staff members.

But when the police released the statement, the three of us had been detained until late at night. We were not allowed to call our newsrooms to explain our case.

This incident has taught me a lesson: the ambiguously-worded police statements are often quite misleading.

During our detention I had a chat with an officer. We both agreed it was “a minor case”, but he revealed that “someone” had given orders to give the media a knock for its arrogance.

While this was meant to be comforting words, they brought me chills. The force enforces the law not based on evidence, but they also try to overawe.

Forced to urinate in the open

The officer was actually quite nice, and I didn’t feel aggrieved. It was the media industry that was angry.

What I lost was seven hours. It would be churlish of me to have got angry. After all, journalists must remain calm and professional regardless of circumstances.

The strongest way to state my case is to give a factual account objectively, word for word. The incident enlightened me about the police, so subsequent comments about “a black shadow” didn’t shock me.

When I was forced to urinate openly behind bars during detention, I was already being given a first-hand look at how police power is gradually expanding.

And that’s only a prelude.

Up until today, there have been countless cases of violation of press freedom by the Hong Kong police.

I recall the calmness I had during detention. In Hong Kong, “I don’t believe in the police, but I believe in the rule of law.”

It’s a blessing in disguise that journalists can still believe that the legal system safeguards press freedom - otherwise there is nothing else to believe in.

( Translated by Damon Pang )

Late night snacks with Sham Yee...

2011-11-04T09:07:00.000-07:00

Jackie Chan

[Nov 2011 - The Journalist] Journalists eat at the most irregular hours. It's the nature of their work. Many sit down for lunch when others are having afternoon tea. Late night snacks replace dinners.

For those of us who work into the early hours the most important was less the food than the closing time of the eating establishments. So, often, the question of the moment was: Where do we go for the late, late night snack?

Thank heavens we have such a thing as a late night snack directory. A walking one at that.

It goes by the name of Sham Yee-lan. More popularly known as Shamyee. Thirty years in the making, she began as a junior reporter, working her way up to assignment editor or news editor in the western context.

Shamyee who is now teaching at Shue Yan University, says late-night snacking was a way of life for her generation of journalists. They have since been replaced by the “cafe generation”.

According to Shamyee journalists in her time went out for snacks in the early hours of the morning at least three times a week. “Sometimes, when you’re working very hard, a good late-night meal is good reward for yourself. It’s also a way of relieving work pressure.” she said.

Shamyee says hot pot was a popular choice. “If we’re off duty the next day, we would sit around the hot pot until 4am.” Places they frequented were the likes of Tai Woo Restaurant in Causeway Bay for local fare, or Hsin Kuang Restaurant in Wanchai for Teochew cuisine.

Sometimes they forayed to Lan Kwai Fong for long discussions over a glass of wine before going for supper in a group of six or more. Later, when incomes improved they favoured Japanese restaurants for sashimi and sushi.

To celebrate a colleague’s birthday or a big festival, they would go to a karaoke and sing through the night; everyone then being a “super vocalist”. Shamyee remembers, with a great deal of laughter, that the closest she got to being crazy was going off to buy raw food at a 24-hour supermarket after working late into the night. They she and her friends to Shek O for a barbecue. “We lit the grill at 2am,” she recalls.

The present generation of journalists may get together in groups for social activities but meals like hot pot are off the menu. Quite a few are concerned about gaining weight. Others regard marbled beef or geoduck simply over the top. So they compromise over a cafe meal.

When we think café we think of those located in Mong Kok or Causeway Bay. Some of are operated by journalists or former journalists. TC2 café in Mong Kok is one example.

TC2 café boss Patrick used to work in Commercial Radio, TVB and Cable TV. He left the beat three years ago to start a new life in catering. Patrick said that when he was still a journalist, he used to go to bars with colleagues after work. “When I worked at Cable TV, our centre at Tsim Sha Tsui was very close to the bars and I went there quite often.” He would have late night suppers with colleagues. Patrick said: “Journalists from the electronic media and those from newspapers did not mix together for activities, unless they had been classmates.”

Now, as a cafe boss, Patrick sees his customers keeping to two separate groups from the electronic media and the print media. But the talk is similar, even when different generations are involved.

“Sometimes, I listen to their whispers. They’re mainly talking about their superiors. At times they may discuss how different media handled the same assignment with their different skills. Sometimes, they may discuss the up-to-dated hot social issues because many of my old customers are from political beats.” Patrick said.

When the “death” of former Chinese leader Jiang Zemin was reported -- or misreported – by ATV, he had also joined in their discussions.

A common trait among journalists of whatever generation, is the long wait for everyone to turn up. “They normally don’t come on time. So if you’re making a reservation for a table, it’s better to mention that you’re journalists. It will be much easier for us to arrange the table.”

So next time you decide to go to this café, be sure to identify yourself. They may give you a better discount.

(Translated by Luther Ng)

People often associate late-night supping with weight-gain but Cynthia Wong, a dietician, thinks that taking late suppers may not be directly to blame. It all depends on whether your daily intake of calories is more than required.

“If our body clock is reset forward late-night snack is only the last one of our three daily regular meals. And if we do not exceed the normal daily intake of calories, there should be no problem at all.” She said, for example, the upper limit of the daily intake of calories for an adult weighing 120 lbs is 1500 kcal. If the person takes 500 kcal more than the daily requirement, he or she will have a weight gain of 1 pound after one week.

Wong says some journalists went to her centre for help in reducing weight. She thinks that many journalists wake up at noon but they should still take their lunch as usual. And when it is around 3 or 4 p.m., they can take a breakfast amount of food as their afternoon tea -- a cup of coffee plus a sandwich. And if journalists are unable to eat in the evening in the rush to complete their stories, Cynthia suggests they take some biscuits to keep hunger at bay. When they finish their work they can have late supper in place of dinner. “So the late-night snack will not be counted as an additional meal.” she said.

We still need to take late supper in a healthy way. For those journalists who like to eat hot pot, Cynthia Wong suggests choosing a clear soup, like parsley with preserved egg. “ Spicy soup base or satay soup base is too greasy and we should try to avoid,” she said.

“We can still eat beef in hot pot, but we need to use fresh beef and avoid marbled beef.” Seafood and meat balls are healthier choices.

As for cafe snacks, it may be difficult to skip chips and chicken wings. But try at least to give more attention to the drinks. Fruit teas and scented teas are good choices. “Many think that juices are healthy but a glass of juice contains 140 kcal. It’s equal to a glass of soft drink,” Cynthia said.

For desserts, Cynthia suggests choosing fruit mitsumame (a kind of starch jelly) or sweet potato soup. “We should not pour too much sweet soup into the starch jelly. It's all right to eat the sweet potato because it is a kind of high-fibre food.” She said. A bowl of black sesame paste contains 300 to 400 kcal. This is equal to two bowls of rice and those who want to avoid a weight gain should keep this at arm's length.

Even if a late supper replaces your dinner it may still harm your health if you sleep after a full meal. According to the past researches, late-night eating and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease are co-related and it also causes indigestion. So we all you late night birds – keep an eye on your meals in the wee hours.

(Translated by Luther Ng)

Back to school

2011-11-03T09:09:00.000-07:00

[Nov 2011 - The Journalist] Time for a news break...and back to school.

Its that time of the year for Cable TV reporter Alex Koo and Hong Kong Economic Journal political reporter Joshua But. Both were awarded the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office's Chevening Scholarships.

Mr Koo is taking up his Master in Political Philosophy at the University of York while Mr But is is reading Political Communication at the University of Sheffield.

Mr Koo, widely known as “Koo Sir” for his fondness for books, said he is prepared to camp in the library to indulge himself, resisting the temptation to travelling and party.

Mr But hopes to pursue a politics-related career upon completion of his master's degree.

Meanwhile South China Morning Post medical reporter Ng Yuk-hang is also studying the British way. Awarded the Swire/Cathy Pacific Scholarship, Ms Ng is spending the forthcoming year in the prestigious St Antony’s College of the University of Oxford to study history. She aspires to make an in-depth academic journey into Hong Kong history, especially looking into the old days of the Post.

The Chinese University’s Master of Cultural Management has become a popular choice among journalists for local studies in recent years.

Joining the cohort is RTHK reporter Choi Tak-wai, who has already met Phoenix TV’s Brian Yu and former ATV reporter Simone Chan – both pursuing part-time studies – during the orientation week.

The Journalist wishes all of them success!

Unity across the Straits

2011-11-02T09:44:00.000-07:00

[Nov 2011 - The Journalist] The Hong Kong Journalists Association initiated the “Wear Black” movement on September 12 to protest against police suppression of freedom of the press during Vice-Premier Li Keqiang’s visit. To extend their support across the sea, the Association of Taiwan Journalists also had their version of “Wear Black” on Facebook. They called on our Taiwanese counterparts to take pictures of themselves – wearing black and holding signs in support of Hong Kong’s freedom of the press – and upload them on its Facebook page.

Within a few days, dozens of Taiwanese journalists showed their warm support to the movement. Some of them thought the unity of Hong Kong journalists was miraculous, especially after seeing the swiftly organised protest march could gather hundreds of journalists. The Association told the Journalist they are concerned with Hong Kong’s media freedom and are happy to grant support to any future activities.

Lings across the harbour

2011-11-01T09:44:00.000-07:00

[Nov 2011 - The Journalist] Hong Kong swimming team member John Ling Tin-yu was crowned the champion of Hong Kong’s first cross-harbour swim in 33 years. While he beat 978 competitors by finishing 1.8 kilometers in a spectacular time of 20 minutes, 34.4 seconds, it will be even more surprising to know the father of this 18-year-old is also a journalist – Apple Daily photographer Marco Ling .

The proud dad said he had made no particular effort in nurturing John’s swimming skill, except to bring him to the swimming pool after seeing his talent and interest. “John started swimming at four or five. Kids either like playing football or swimming anyway,” said Mr Ling.

But that was not the only joy for the Ling family that day. Tin-long – John’s younger brother – was third runner-up in the team race across the harbour. The 13-year-old had spent his childhood swimming with his elder brother.

( all the gossip translated by Tanna Chong )

《記者之聲》 2011年8月號目錄

2011-08-20T13:28:00.000-07:00

專題：警權膨脹　七一夜踐踏採訪自由　　　Focus: Police Power Rises, Press Freedom Plummets

標題 Item Title	作者 Author
封面故事｜警方不依《警察通例》行事　　2011年7.1遊行後，警察清場大舉拘捕二百多名示威者，清場期間一度出動胡椒噴霧鎮壓。部分當晚在場採訪的記者，亦受到警方不合理對待。最少19名前線記者被胡椒噴霧噴中......	雷子樂
封面故事｜漫天開警誡線　記者採訪受阻　　採訪大型示威活動經驗不算很多，但今年「七一夜」身處其中，近距離經歷見證示威者、警員及新聞工作者的三方衝擊。......	何永康
封面故事｜七一晚　我中椒　　七一當晚，我是悲喜交集的，喜是目睹港人願意向替補機制說不，為自己發聲。悲是飽受胡椒噴霧「招呼」及粗暴對待，頓覺警權日漸膨脹，由保護市民為主的公僕，降格至完成任務為上的執法機器。作為「中椒」記者，有必要來個足本播放細說當晚經過......	張家灝
封面故事｜警員為何對我動粗？！　　踏入攝影記者生涯7年，採訪過不少大型示威，近年社運人士與警員埋身肉搏場面愈來愈多，警方部署更趨向嚴陣以待。夾縫中的記者，遭殃機會大增，七一夜就是一個明顯例子，警方發射胡椒噴霧，記者首當其衝......	廖雁雄
封面故事｜採訪被當成疑犯　我感十分屈辱　　還在求學階段，已經踏足一名實習記者的道路。原因只有一個，就是這份工作太有意義了。在這個世代尤其有意義。在個人利益掛帥的今天，人要堅守人性價值不容易......	蔡珮雯
城中熱話｜僭建風波席捲全港　傳媒聯手踢爆	黃偉駿
城中熱話｜揭露僭建亂象　重建公義社會	杜耀明
記者之聲｜入行一年　喜樂比痛苦多	莊丹娜
放眼國際｜為何尼日利亞可以但香港不能？ - IFEX會議見聞	麥燕庭
記協之聲｜捍衛新聞自由　提升專業的一年 - 2010/2011年度執行委員會報告	香港記者協會
記協之聲｜為您服務的新執行委員會	香港記者協會
記協之聲｜記協七一遊行	香港記者協會
風聞｜《晴報》面世　壹傳媒加入戰團　免費報業進入戰國時代	《記聲》
風聞｜《南早》招聘大量人手挽士氣	《記聲》
記協之聲｜週年晚宴圖片輯	香港記者協會
------------------------	-----------
Cover Story｜Police abandon Police General Orders for July 1 confrontation After the July 1 demonstration police cleared the area with overwhelming force, arrested more than 200 demonstrators and, in the process, used peppersprays to subdue resistance. Some of the reporters on the spot were also roughly handled by the police. At least 19 frontline reporters were pepper-sprayed.......	Ken Lui
Cover Story｜July 1 Protest: Reporters targeted by police I do not have much experience covering large-scale protests. But this year I was one of those at the scene of the scuffles which erupted in the evening of July 1. I was witness to the confrontation between the protestors, police and members of the press......	Ho Wing-hong
Cover Story｜On the frontline: Pepper-sprayed by the police On the evening of July 1, I was stricken with grief and gladness at the same time......	Patrick Cheung Ka-ho
Cover Story｜Photo-journalist: “Why was I roughed up?” I have covered many large-scale demonstrations during my seven years as a photo-journalist, but in recent times the police have tightened the net when dealing with protesters as the number of scuffles have risen......	Liu Ngan-hung
Cover Story｜Arrested - a humiliating experience as a police suspect Journalism had me captivated while I was still a student. But it was not till I became an intern reporter that I began to understand the difficulties of upholding human values, especially in a money-oriented society.......	Kiri Choy
Talk of the Town｜Media unite to spotlight the wrongs of the rich and famous – CE not excluded	Alvin Wong
Talk of the Town｜Illegal structures scandalize highest levels of government	To Yiu-ming
Voice of Journalist｜The joys of breaking into journalism	Tanna Chong
Voice of JA｜Mongolia and Nigeria can have it but not Hong Kong...Why?	Mak Yin-ting
Voice of JA｜Year in balance: Defending press freedom, promoting members' interests	HKJA
Voice of JA｜The New Excom That Serves You	HKJA
Voice of JA｜HKJA in July 1 march	HKJA
Gossip｜Free-for-all in the mud with yet another freebie coming on-stream	"The Journalist"
Gossip｜Posting all things bright and beautiful..at the Post	"The Journalist"
Voice of JA｜HKJA 43rd Anniversary Gala Dinner	HKJA

警方不依《警察通例》行事　傳媒七一夜採訪遭殃

2011-08-19T10:01:00.000-07:00

雷子樂　香港記者協會執委

[ENG]【記聲2011年8月號】2011年7.1遊行後，警察清場大舉拘捕二百多名示威者，清場期間一度出動胡椒噴霧鎮壓。部分當晚在場採訪的記者，亦受到警方不合理對待。最少19名前線記者被胡椒噴霧噴中、有記者向警察表明身份後，仍被警員故意用胡椒噴霧「兜口兜臉」施射、有記者被警察推撞甚至叉頸、按頭，更有前線記者竟被警察拘捕。

警方叉頸按頭，出動手銬，記者也遭殃。 ( 明報提供圖片 )

警方在中環清場期間，封鎖線一度延伸至金鐘，並故意留難能清楚證明身份的電視台攝影師。

7月15日，香港記者協會及香港攝影記者協會五名代表與警察公共關係科會面，就警察當日暴力對待記者、嚴重侵犯採訪自由提出交涉。

記協、警方先就當日的封鎖線問題進行討論。

清塲期間不合理封鎖

根據《警察通例》第39章，事發現場的警務人員「須以互諒互讓的態度，盡量配合傳媒工作；以及不應妨礙傳媒的攝錄工作」。

記協主席麥燕庭指出，警方清場期間，一度在現場作出不合理的封鎖，中環的清場行動，封鎖線一度伸延至金鐘！

記協表明警察行動期間，若在現場作出過份的封鎖並不合理，麥燕庭表示記協曾諮詢過人權律師的意見，得出結論是若作出過份的封鎖，情況等同「禁錮」。

警察公共關係科總警司李建輝在會議上回應指，警方採取行動時，一定要設鎖封線，目的之一是要在拘捕行動前，分隔開誰是參與者。他亦表示，清場期間，記者只要能展示證件，不會被拘捕。麥燕庭已即場表明，記者採訪，有需要在現場作出監察，不同意過份的封鎖，「不是你（警察）叫記者離開，記者就會離開，即使在中南海採訪，記者也是這樣」。

當日採訪示威期間，警察對部份能清楚表明身份的記者，曾作出阻撓，記協在會上亦有提出交涉。其中一名電視台攝影記者，將背包及記者證留在採訪車內抬著貼上電視台台徽的大型攝影機，到場採訪。警察仍堅持要他出示記者證，才能進入封鎖線內拍攝。電視台的記者已向警察表明攝影師確是他的同事，警察亦一度留難，雙方爭持了好一段時間，攝影師其後始獲放行。

記協代表在會上對此表示不滿，認為警方應採取靈活、彈性的手段處理事件，不要妨礙記者的正常採訪。

警方的代表堅持一定要出示有效證件，方能證實記者的身份。記協表示會提醒記者採訪要緊記攜帶證件，但對警察當時的官僚態度，仍是相當不滿。與會的記協代表質疑，該名攝影師當時抬著貼上台徽的大機，又有同事證實他的身份，「難道他會是個小偷，偷了電視台的攝錄機去扮記者嗎？」警方的代表其後也表示，類似情況警員應靈活處理。

表明記者身分　仍被按頭部鎮壓

清場期間最少19名記者被胡椒噴霧射中，記協在會議上表明，記者採訪期間，明白場面混亂，有隨時「中椒」的心理準備，若警察不是故意，記者也是無話可說。不過，記協指出，清場期間，有記者被警員故意推撞，有文字記者清楚向警員表明自己是在場採訪的記者後，仍被警員「兜口兜臉」噴中、有記者被警員故意按住頭部「鎮壓」，記協表明這是不可接受！

警方如臨大敵，胡椒噴霧對者示威者與傳媒。

警方代表指沒有收到有關的資料，又指有關情況不應出現，表示記者可以投訴。記協代表反駁指，在場採訪的記者，往往會將記錄現場情況視為首要任務，很少會花時間跟警察在這些事件上糾纏。筆者亦相信，但凡採訪過監警會新聞的同行，或多或少會對投訴警察機制的公信力有所質疑！

無理拘捕19歲實習記者

另一宗令記協不滿的事件，是一名19歲實習記者，因沒攜帶記者證，清場期間被警察誤當成示威者錯誤拘捕。記協代表在會上指出，該名記者被捕一刻是站在電視台攝影師的「大機」旁，明顯是進行採訪。但警方的代表稱，該名記者當時未能出示證件，「現場亦沒報稱是記者」（這與該名記者的說法有出入）。警方代表又稱，她在口供紙上沒表明記者的身份。記協代表即場質疑，對調查程序最為了解的警務人員，究竟有否清楚告知她的權利，有否向她說明如有不滿可如何投訴？

清場期間不合理封鎖。

在會議前一天，警務處處長曾偉雄公開回應有關事件時，曾反駁說「冇人有特權」，指當晚的被捕者相信都是參與非法集會，又指責有人「一方面採取不合作態度，一方面透過公共媒體提出指控，是無助調查」。但筆者當日曾向該記者查詢，她表示當晚其實不斷向警察道明她正在採訪，只是警察不理會。她獲釋後，亦只知道12月要再回警署報到，並不知道可否在期間再向警方提供她不合理被捕的資料。

清場期間發生多宗記者受不合理干預事件，與會的警察公共關係科警司董偉璋表示，警察公共關係科的「傳媒隊」當日及在其他的大型活動中，也有派員到場作出協調。不過記協代表質疑，若「傳媒隊」能有效發揮作用，何以當晚仍會出現多宗不愉快事件。記協代表要求日後在採訪現場一旦發生「警記爭拗」，能否有一個即場的聯絡方法，如手提電話，可盡快找到「傳媒隊」人員到場調停。警方的回覆是，記者屆時可致電警察公共關係科的傳媒熱線！各位行家，請問你們對上一次能駁通警察公共關係科電話是在何時？

除了7.1遊行問題，記協及攝協代表還就中聯辦外的採訪限制作出投訴。攝協代表指出，警方最近禁絕記者在中聯辦外花槽這「有利位置」採訪，要記者進入中聯辦正門「斜對面」的採訪區拍攝。攝協代表指出，現場的警員不讓記者到花槽上採訪，理由是「站在花槽後危險」，但與此同時，又有警員可站在花槽上監視示威者。記協對警員這個「反智」的「理由」表示強烈不滿，要求警方撤銷有關採訪限制，警方代表答應，會向西區警署作跟進。記協立此存照！

漫天開警誡線　記者採訪受阻

2011-08-19T10:00:00.000-07:00

何永康

[ENG]【記聲2011年8月號】採訪大型示威活動經驗不算很多，但今年「七一夜」身處其中，近距離經歷見證示威者、警員及新聞工作者的三方衝擊。

機動部隊在中銀對開列陣，重重包圍示威者。

七一夜有兩邊戰線，我較多時間身處中銀大廈對開「人民力量」示威群。當過千人遊行隊伍的龍頭尚在金鐘，機動部隊警員早於中銀大廈對開、橫跨兩邊行車線一字型列陣，擺開警方人鍊，背後再有重重警車。警方的佈置，視覺上已經示意：不許任何人再前進。

我當時心中第一個疑問，人民力量打算到禮賓府示威，那是山上的位置。若然在山腳已受阻，示威者會願意叫兩句口號就和平散去嗎?

現場吵鬧　預警聲音微弱

人民力量是相對較有組織的示威群，他們沒打算千人齊衝，找來幾十個壯丁刻意走前排。這幾十人臉戴面具，也有著名的立法會議員，大概佔據兩條行車線。兩邊則是簇擁著為數更多的新聞工作者，當中主要是估計一旦發生事故要第一時間拍下紀實的攝影記者。換言之，示威者前方身貼身，有相當部分是警員和記者。而我和兩位攝影同事身旁都是警員。

較後排的警員先拉起兩條橙色橫額，上面寫有警告字句：「警察封鎖線，不得越過」（Police Cordon, Do Not Cross）。隨後十幾米外，有警員用大聲公讀出警告說話。但聲音微弱，被現場嘈雜聲蓋過，我無法聽清楚內容，亦不肯定有多少人聽得到。

當雙方開始推撞。示威者與警員固然角力，記者就夾在中間，我和很多記者一起被猛力的擠出外圍，同一時間又不斷被警員推回去。說時遲，那時快，我還未懂得反應，喉嚨已感受一陣辛辣。警方已施放了第一次胡椒噴霧，第一排的記者已經悉數被射中。

警方先噴胡椒　後拉動武警告

疑問再來：警員明知眼前是一堆拿著相機攝影機的記者，都照推照撞照噴?

大家還未定神，四分鐘後，一位示威者向警員掟出如拳頭般大的雜物，警員即時再噴射胡椒噴霧。只見一線胡椒噴霧在我額前飛出，之後如雨灑下。這一輪，我的兩位攝影同事、和其他多位攝記面部和身體都被射中。我比較幸運，只有右手灼痛。

數秒鐘後，後排的警員才拉起另一幅紅色橫額：「停止衝擊，否則使用武力」（Stop Chargling, Or We Use Force）

或許有人質疑，「武力」定義是什麼，是否包括胡椒噴霧。然而警方這條紅色橫額，卻在第二次使用胡椒噴霧後才匆匆展示，是否來得太遲呢?

大會堂封鎖線長達「九里遠」

警方施胡椒噴霧，在採訪風眼的傳媒首當其衝。 ( 明報提供照片 )

隨後的個多小時後，人民力量與警方都冷靜下來。我被指派轉到干諾道中支援同事在外圍採訪社民連「馬路」的清場過程。清場位置是大會堂側，但我們步至「香港會」對開馬路已經被警員阻止前進，說任何人都不能再進入封鎖範圍。

我們是電視台記者，當時記者證放在採訪車上，但攝影器材咪高峰都有台徽標誌。站在封鎖線的警員說，任何人包括記者都不能前進。

疑問又來了，警方已經控制大局，並開始清場抬人。為何封鎖線還要封到「九里遠」? 其他記者亦遭受類似的對待。我們別無選擇，唯有多走幾步，繞過舊天星碼頭行人隧道，才成功到達大會堂。

在近日多次示威集會，警方是採用包圍式清理和拘捕，即當集會人士堵塞馬路後，警員在外圍重重包圍。集會人士即使已經冷靜下來，或不想再參加集會，或願意順應警方呼籲散去，均不可獲准離開。換言之，當他們被包圍後，肯定會被拘捕，最終目的地必然是警署。

警方部署一網打盡

在清場範圍內的記者亦一樣，要出示記者證，才可以離開。忘記帶記者證者，即使你手持印有台徽的重型攝影機，拿著腳架、鋼梯，都會被視為「懷疑示威者並企圖逃走」。過程中，我們幾經交涉，最後驚動指揮官到場，才可以離開。

這一點亦說明當晚人權監察羅沃啟先生以觀察員身份身處其中並留守至最後一刻，最後卻差點被警方拘捕，完全出於警方「一網打盡的部署」。

警方可能會怪記者，明知有亂還要跑在最前，但傳媒的責任永遠在第一線，忠實紀錄下將會發生或者可能發生的事。此外有人要濫用自由，濫用權力，都應該在我們監察範圍之內。

七一晚　我中椒

2011-08-19T09:58:00.000-07:00

張家灝　經濟日報前記者

[ENG]【記聲2011年8月號】七一當晚，我是悲喜交集的，喜是目睹港人願意向替補機制說不，為自己發聲。悲是飽受胡椒噴霧「招呼」及粗暴對待，頓覺警權日漸膨脹，由保護市民為主的公僕，降格至完成任務為上的執法機器。作為「中椒」記者，有必要來個足本播放細說當晚經過。首先聲明，年資尚淺的我，已在多次採訪示威新聞期間，遭受過警方惡意阻撓，老實說，對於警方手法不存好感，這篇文章說不上客觀，請容許我加句高登術語：「不喜勿插」。

遊行初時平靜中銀大廈前警佈防

當晚有兩大戰場，我負責採訪人民力量一方的情況，由灣仔遊行至中環，其實沿途可說極之平靜，事先完全無如箭在弦的緊張，人民力量成員每走數十步就坐下數分鐘，聆聽黃毓民指揮講話。警方默默在旁跟隨，並無發出任何警告訊號，任由人民力量繼續遊行，直到人民力量抵達中銀大廈附近，警方突然佈陣。

我的臉部中了警員數掌。（廖雁雄攝）

他們築起兩排人牆設置封鎖線，後方則有持盾防暴警察作戒備，再後方還有數百名警員隨時支援。大約11時30分，前排警員開始收緊封鎖線（片二），驅趕記者，但此時氣氛仍不算緊張，因為警方未有發出任何勸喻，更莫論有預告會發射胡椒噴霧。

警察與示威者這樣對峙逾十五分鐘後，人民力量黃毓民突然走近警察封鎖線，大批記者包圍採訪，黃毓民向記者表明，他們會正式「走向」警察封鎖線，還要求「記者行過少少，否則你們影唔到。」

本來過程尚算平靜，但黃毓民話畢後，其身後大批人民力量成員開始慢慢湧上前方，演變成近百名示威者以包著前排十多名記者（包括我在內）的人肉方陣形式，湧向警方長長的封鎖線。

當時我被身後一股龐大力量推向警員堆，我一觸碰到那批警員時，他們立即將我推回示威者一方，雙方正式展開衝突。　　

我高舉記者証　仍遭粗暴對待

那時我已經高舉雙手、手持記者證，向警員示意我們的身份，大叫「推湧上前的只是後排示威者」。但警員似乎無視我的說話，一邊向我們高呼「你唔好亂黎」、「你試下再推」、「你想襲警呀」等字眼，激動的程度較示威者有過之而無不及。一邊又以「相撲手」形式不斷伸掌推打（片一）我們，如果警方說這是克制的防守動作，我會形容他們是進行「攻擊性防守」，當晚我的頸部及面部亦中了數掌。　

示威者及警方同時間扭作一團，推撞了半分鐘左右，作為「夾心」的我及數名行家都已被推倒在地上，正當我欲回身站起來，向警察投訴人群當中有記者之際，說時遲那時快，一位站在第三排的督察突然作出「後排攻擊」，向我發射胡椒噴霧。當時我只顧與第一排的警察理論，根本未有聽到警方作出任何警告，亦估不計到他們會突然使用武器，所以我在完全無防備的狀態下，頭髮、眼部、口部及頸部都「完全中椒」。

有一點不得不讚，「中椒」後的我完全張不開眼睛，失明了約5分鐘，幸好有警員將我拉離戰場，不停幫我以清水洗眼，才得以重見天日。

之後我走向該名向我發射胡椒噴霧的督察理論，並表明記者身份。我先問他為何要發射胡椒噴霧，以及為何沒有事前警告。但他只拋下一句：「我唔理，我只係見到你衝埋?！」

後記：

事後我回看錄影片段，發現警方曾在發射胡椒噴霧期間，在後排向示威人士出示警告橫額（片三），但當時過百人扭在一團，不少行家及示威者已經倒在地上，試問當時千軍萬馬混亂之中，有誰會留意到後排哪一小塊警告標語？而且警方一直未有證據，證明他們是「事前」作出警告。

記者被當作示威者般粗暴對待，並不是第一次。去年政改「起錨」高官出巡時，警方也將記者視之為示威者，處處百般阻撓。究竟警方有否尊重新聞自由？

記者的確沒有特權，但不代表警察可以沒有事先警告下胡亂對公眾人士與記者使用暴力。我當晚夾在示威者與警方之中，除了描述我的親身經歷之外，我在網上搜尋了數條當晚短片，作為我的文字更全面的補白。

延伸觀看：

片一http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4oG4boHquQ（04:50、08:40）

片二http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3xZ793b5UY&feature=related

片三http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqfItr0HV-4

警員為何對我動粗？！

2011-08-19T09:17:00.000-07:00

廖雁雄　攝影記者

[ENG]【記聲2011年8月號】踏入攝影記者生涯7年，採訪過不少大型示威，近年社運人士與警員埋身肉搏場面愈來愈多，警方部署更趨向嚴陣以待。夾縫中的記者，遭殃機會大增，七一夜就是一個明顯例子，警方發射胡椒噴霧，記者首當其衝。

當晚，人民力量遊行到中銀大廈外，警方在現場部署過百警力阻止示威者繼續前進。我與各傳媒行家約30至40人，得知示威者將衝擊警方防線後，即紛紛搶佔有利位置，準備拍攝雙方接觸時的情況。

眼見數十名示威者互纏手臂，一字排開，形成人牆，與警方對峙，作出隨時衝擊準備。這時採訪記者變成夾在示威者與警方人牆之間，進退兩難。

記者也被警方暴力推撞，當場理論也是徒然。( 明報提供照片 )

不久，警察與示威者互相展開推撞，現場情況混亂，雙方夾著記者前衝，我看見有示威者及警員在衝擊中倒地。

先中胡椒噴霧後被推跌

情況愈趨失控，有在場人士向警員投擲水樽，警方馬上將行動升級，試圖控制現場，我目睹有記者被警方暴力推撞，警方一度施放胡椒噴霧，場面混亂下，不單有警員「中招」，夾在示威者與警方中間的許多同行，都不幸被噴中，我是其中的一個，幸而胡椒噴霧未有傷及我的眼睛，除了面部灸痛外，還能繼續工作，但有不少行家在警方胡椒噴霧攻擊下，被噴中眼睛，需忍耐痛苦以清水沖洗。

當我準備繼續拍攝之際，有一名警員突然走近我，正面用力按著我的肩膀，雖然我身上沒有掛上記者證，但已即時大叫數聲，表明我的記者身份，但對方並不理會，試圖將我的身體壓下，直到我失去平衡倒地。我雖然沒有受傷，但感到十分無奈，深知即使與該名警員理論也是徒然，唯有爬起繼續攝影採訪工作。

我明白出現混亂場面，身處當中的記者如能在顯眼位置掛上記者證，對自己也是一種保障。但當時警方應是很清楚夾著中間有一批抓著大相機的採訪傳媒。我很想弄明白，對我動粗的警員是依據什麼理由，對我採取粗暴行動？

警方識別攝影師有何困難？

當晚我只是進行採訪拍攝，並沒有對任何人構成危害。據我所知，有電視台攝影師受到警員更暴力對待，也有攝影師聲稱混亂間曾被警員打。我不理解警方對於識別揹著重型攝影器材的攝影師，有何困難？我亦有疑問為何警員處理場面時，做不到警方經常聲稱會協助記者採訪的原則？是前線的執行者溝通出現問題，還是原則有變？有關問題若不能溝通與改善，同樣衝突只會在每一次大型示威中重覆出現，無日無之。

示威後期，當警方逐一抬走示威者階段，警民關係科人員才到場，這時採訪秩序才有改善。我明白示威情況千變萬化，每次均可能出現不同局面，但站在記者立場，我們只希望將現場情況拍下，並非站在警方對立面，記者們需要的不是特權，但我希望警方能理解攝影記者採訪時，不能被局限於特定位置，尤其是這種隨時有機動變化的大型示威，記者一定要有較大彈性，有需要時可自由走動拍攝。

採訪被當成疑犯　我感十分屈辱

2011-08-19T09:00:00.000-07:00

蔡珮雯　新唐人電視台實習記者

[ENG]【記聲2011年8月號】還在求學階段，已經踏足一名實習記者的道路。原因只有一個，就是這份工作太有意義了。在這個世代尤其有意義。在個人利益掛帥的今天，人要堅守人性價值不容易。傳媒亦承受重大考驗，壓力下低頭的，傾向選擇性報導某些受欺壓群眾，未能始終以大眾利益為依歸。但是，透過媒體以全面掌握社會不同類型的真相對於人們而言又實在太重要了。那就由我做記者吧，我想，我一定要做好。因此毅然加入一個獨立於任何財團或政體的電視台，新唐人電視台，燃起自己的一點燭光。

七一當晚，到干諾道中目標只有一個，就是攝錄街頭示威事件實況，履行職責。結果竟被警察當成示威者拘捕。

當晚經過

當一些位高權重的人公開說一些與事實不符的話，我只能以事實真相擋之。

當晚我逾十一時到現場，警察手拉手圍住遍地示威者。我在外圍拍攝，只能勉強拍到入面鏡頭。我身旁一名警員見狀，指示我前面手拖手的兩名警員，說讓她也進去吧，不用她拍得那麼辛苦。˼ 接着，兩警員鬆開手，讓我進去拍。

我跟其他新聞工作者一起拍攝場面一直到清場完畢，我整晚沒有坐過。當所有坐在一起的示威者都被拘捕後，指揮警察開始把目光轉向我們這群站在一旁拍的記者，指令要查我們有無記者證，沒有證的都要帶回警署。警察先問我身旁手執相機拍攝的男士有無記者證，接著他被帶走。然後警察問我。我表明是記者，出來時匆忙間忘了帶記者證，指揮警察要帶走我。就這樣，凌晨兩點，我被帶上警車。

監視我的警員告訴我，回警署後，公司傳真一封信來，核實我的記者身份，就沒有問題了。我按照她所要求的，打電話要同事傳真信件到警署。凌晨四點，香港仔警署收到該信。我詢問警員是否可放我了。她說要等CID表態。我問她要等多久，她推說不知。

就這樣等到清晨六點才到我，我才知道要落口供。這位警員對該警員說我是記者，公司已傳真文件核實身份。該警員完全沒問我之前一晚的事，只是索取更多個人資料。然後要我簽名認同他們。

完事後，又回房等。接著，我被帶去打手指模。我不肯簽同意書。警員訛稱同意書與手指模無關，打手指模是必須的，該條文是指其他個人資料，哄我簽了。然後，按着我的手指，打了十隻手指和手掌模。他們要求我手拿一張印有編碼的白色Ａ４紙拍正面照及側面照。整個過程，我被當成疑犯對待，內心有說不出的屈辱。

接著我和示威者一起等保釋，等了逾兩小時。初初監警說要付保釋金，問我身上有幾多錢。後來，警員告訴全部人自簽擔保就可以走。警員表示不簽不可以放我走。議論不果，我在早上十一時自簽離開。

後記

記得在警車上，女警語重深長地對我說，你以後還是別去那種地方採訪了。我不明白去哪採訪跟她有什麼關係，不過，仍告訴她，我下次都會去，下次我一定有帶記者證，那不就可以了嗎？女警當下無言。

關心我的人，問我發生了這事，會因害怕而以後不幹這工作嗎？我堅定告訴他們，該做的事，一定會繼續做。事實上，會因此而放棄的人，當初又是為了甚麼而開始呢？社會最大的可惜，莫過於該怕的人不怕，不該怕的人卻不理智地怕了。

無端遭了這等罪，幸好內心有平靜，平靜源於信仰。自己沒有做對不起大家的事，又有甚麼好怕呢？是非黑白不會為要顛倒它的人而有絲毫改變。我不但有在場的所有眼睛為證，還有天地為證。

壓力，是有的。當一些位高權重的人公開說一些與事實不乎的話，說你參與示威，此時的我只剩下事實的真相當自己的擋箭牌。我亦因此見識到，我們平時從新聞聽到後所能相信的，或謹謹要知道一件事的最起碼事實，也不是那麼容易。

在警署坐着等侯時，我望着四周的環境，感覺很唏噓。究竟是為了甚麼？我就是太清楚，不是為了自己。當晚，我可以告訴大家，我為大家付出了，希望你們從新聞報導得益更多。

僭建風波席捲全港　傳媒聯手踢爆

2011-08-19T08:36:00.000-07:00

黃偉駿　蘋果日報記者

[ENG]【記聲2011年8月號】申訴專員公署在4月中發表調查報告，批評地政總署與屋宇署兩大部門，在處理新界丁屋僭建問題上執法不力。其實申訴專員公署批評丁屋僭建，幾乎每隔數年一次，由於問題沒解決，每次都是老調重彈，社會上無人留意。但今次引起出乎意料的巨大迴響與連鎖效應，高官、政客、名人寓所僭建，連特首曾蔭權也不倖免，僭建風暴席捲全港，為時一個多月。

報告在4月發表後，輿論最初針對新界僭建丁屋，丁屋本身已被視為原居民特權，丁屋僭建變相合法，城市人一定視之為特權之中的特權。

新界鄉事派對今次報告反應相當大，他們本來已和政府商討「理順」僭建，今年初各鄉事委員會換屆，一批立場較激進的鄉紳當選，他們主張向政府強硬抗爭，夕陽政府弱勢，鄉事派不斷造勢，要求爭取僭建合法化。

發展局局長林鄭月娥即使妥協容許72年後建成的丁屋，天台的半層僭建物可以透過登記換取暫緩清拆，變相合法化，但原居民堅持，舊契村屋不應有任何高度限制。鄉議局內的鷹派甚至形容，這些高於3層的村屋室內面積細小，居住狀況甚至慘過劏房，指鹿為馬的程度拍得上替補機制。之後鄉事派上街示威，政府未來是否明確執法，有待時間證明。

各大傳媒在這次僭建風波，罕見地扮演了「聯手踢爆採訪」的功能，幾近連續一個月( 見表 )，行家們以競賽速度鬥快揭發高官、名人的寓所僭建，幾乎每隔數天又會有新個案上A1，而且官階越揭越高、越揭越知名，傳媒這次聯合發揮有效的監督作用，給政府重大壓力，不得不正視問題。

追蹤陳鑑林霸地引發第一波

蘋果日報對追蹤僭建新聞發起了第一波，起源自一個投訴，對象是立法會議員陳鑑林，投訴內容本身資料不清，只提及沙田一條村內，有一個立法會議員在村屋對開霸佔官地，經過再追問，才知道對方是陳鑑林。

孫明揚屋子僭建遭釘契，仍置之不理。

追查並不困難，目標已經明確，記者就上門查證，輕易在村內發現陳鑑林所霸官地的位置，雖然僭建風波後來鬧大，但當時追查的目標是霸地而非他的丁屋僭建，我有一個習慣，做這類新聞時，一般會拍下對方的樓宇，方便紀錄及進一步跟進其他新聞。憑多年跟進地政新聞的經驗，在現場已經發現陳鑑林的天台似乎有僭建物。

證據到手，接下來向地政部門查證，相信行家都會知道，政府的回覆往往要數天甚至超過一周，而且亦未必會正面回答問題，甚至等候數天後，只得一句「有關部門正跟進事件」，亦是常見，記者若只是等待政府回覆，新聞就不用做了。

有了照片，便找工程師等專業人士，去判斷村屋有否僭建。新界丁屋的設計劃一，處理上較簡單，其他樓宇可能就要再找出建築圖則對照。

完成了這則新聞後，蘋果日報跟進僭建新聞本已告一段落，沒想到這則報道，卻引來行家的競爭意識，被揭僭建的達官貴人層出不窮。在這種情況下，我也開始了大規模的追查，找到王國興、林瑞麟、唐英年家族等物業都有僭建，加上行家的努力，僭建新聞一波接一拍，幾乎天天新鮮，天天見報。

潘潔孫明揚寓所僭建令事件鬧大

在多名鄉委會與民建聯成員的新界村屋寓所，相繼被揭發僭建或霸地後，僭建風暴開始波及特區政府的管治班子。最先是環境局副局長潘潔位於大埔的寓所，被揭發圍封露台，隨後是教育局局長孫明揚的跑馬地寓所，被揭發僭建了多年，甚至遭屋宇署釘契仍然置之不理，最離譜是被釘契的時間，更是發生在他擔任前房屋及規劃地政局局長期間，而負責將他寓所釘契的屋宇署，正是他掌管的部門之一，事件除了反映為官多年的孫公有法不依，更顯示處理僭建物的機制對業主毫無阻嚇力。

特首物業違規入高潮

特首麥當奴道的物業，露台以玻璃密封，證實違規。

整個僭建風暴由新界鄉紳、立法會議員、高官一步一步逼近高潮，5月底特首曾蔭權位於半山麥當勞道的物業，被傳媒揪出違例以巨型玻璃幕牆密封露台，而同一日，曾班子幾名成員，包括政務司司長唐英年的父親、政制及內地事務局局長林瑞麟、行政會議成員梁智鴻也被揭發物業有僭建。曾蔭權最初回應傳媒時強辯，密封露台未必有問題。事實上，類似曾蔭權物業的舊樓將露台密封，全港比比皆是，曾蔭權的回應，某程度也反映了不少舊樓業主不熟悉法例。最終屋宇署經過一日一夜緊急會議後，判定曾蔭權寓所露台是非法圍封，曾蔭權被逼要公開承諾清拆。

這些僭建報道，十有八九是來自市民舉報。老實說，僭建存在已久，很多人都會問，是否平日就無人舉報呢？我和許多投訴人談過，有人是自身的僭建被政府拆掉，然後發現住在旁邊的達官貴人有僭建卻無須處理，覺得並不公平；有人是單純的路見不平，自己物業並無問題。正是因為僭建過於常見，他們均未意識到「原來僭建是新聞」，所以見到有傳媒把僭建報道放在A1頭條，全都忽然醒覺過來。

一切都由一則投訴開始。老實說，如果陳鑑林的僭建投訴是在前幾年的某一天報道，極有可能被當作一般投訴處理。政府的弱勢、申訴專員的報告，都造就了這一系列新聞。這次事件可以看到，傳媒除了被動報道，亦可透過調查報道，揭露眾人早已麻木的社會不公，監督政府正視問題改進。只要事件的確是市民平日心中所想所念，一旦喚起他們的關注，他們更會和傳媒互動發聲。

依賴讀者爆料

不少僭建個案雖是靠讀者報料，但報料人往往只提供一、兩句線索，例如「林瑞麟家中有僭建」，地址、何種僭建都不會透露。查證過程中，最困難的是找出物業正確位置，要找出大廈的單位平面圖，有時並不輕易，以林瑞麟個案為例，筆者翻查了屋宇署多幅建築圖則，及多次對比現場照片後，才敢肯定林瑞麟寓所的正確位置。

找到物業，要再找出僭建物所在。若跟屋宇署建築圖則不符的搭建物，便可歸類為僭建物。以特首曾蔭權的麥當勞道寓所為例，單位是密封了露台，便與圖則不符。

但根據《建築物條例》F章第11條（1984年版），業主有權以五種不同方式，包括金屬或硬木製仿玻璃窗、玻璃塊、磚塊、混凝土，或任何獲屋宇署批准的物料圍封露台。有關條文直至1992年才廢除，這些複雜的法例歷史，往往很難搞清楚。就曾蔭權的個案，屋宇署更補充，需視乎圍封後會否影響通風、採光等，決定是否要拆除，反映法例有大量灰色地帶。

在僭建風暴最初期的報道中，行家們多數靠與當事人對質、及找專家從照片中驗證，去確定對方的物業是否有僭建，不少當事人由於心虛，多數向記者直認不諱，但並非每次都萬試萬靈。名嘴鄭經翰在山頂種植道21號的豪宅天台，搭建了一間玻璃屋，有市民向筆者任職的報館報料，鄭經翰最初矢口否認有僭建，一時說筆者弄錯，一時又說有入則申請。筆者本來也被名嘴「嚇窒」，幸好慎重起見，到屋宇署查核了建築圖則，才證實大班的寓所天台，的確沒有屋宇署准建的玻璃屋。

揭露僭建亂象　重建公義社會

2011-08-19T07:30:00.000-07:00

杜耀明　香港浸會大學新聞系助理教授

[ENG]【記聲2011年8月號】如果說八十後地產經紀年賺百萬放上報章頭條，是讓世人驚嘆年青人「錢途似咁」，五月以來傳媒浪接一浪報道有頭有面人物寓所有僭建物，又豈止駭人聽聞，更是警世鐘和旱天雷，一面為達官貴人的僭建行為跌破社會的政治道德底線而亮起紅燈，一面不斷狙擊那些敷衍塞責甚至知法犯法的庸官俗吏。民望徘徊低谷的特區政府，結果只有進一步瀕臨信譽破產的邊緣。

申訴專員公署四月下旬發表調查報告，批評新界丁屋僭建問題嚴重。傳媒其後跟進調查，先後發現多位鄉事領袖、立法會議員、知名人物的新界寓所均有僭建物，申訴專員起初訂下的社會議程──新界土地的非法使用，遂加上新焦點──達官貴人的罔顧法規、以身試法。其中環境局副局長潘潔的大埔寓所被發現有多處違規建築，更將傳媒的視線導向官員身上。

議員官員特首難倖免

經過再一輪的挖掘，傳媒揭露的僭建問題看來比申訴專員的結論更為嚴峻。一方面，僭建不是一時一地的異象，而是廣佈全港的常見情況，一些社會名流和政界人物的巿區住所、豪門大宅以至山頂物業，都發現或多或少的違規建築。另一方面，違規者的身份不限於社會知名人士，更包括本港權力核心的成員，如政府部門首長、問責局長、行政會議成員，甚至是行政長官曾蔭權自己。其中以屋宇署署長區載佳的寓所涉嫌違規改建、教育局局長孫明揚跑馬地寓所因僭建物而被「釘契」兩案最是匪夷所思，因為前者帶領的屋宇署正是懲處僭建者的執法部門，而後者被「釘契」時正好是負責土地規劃和房屋政策的特區政府問責局長。

傳媒追捕凝聚公眾壓力

連番揭露加上不停追問，傳媒的效用立竿見影。它既能有效凝聚公眾壓力，也快速聚焦於達官貴人身上。不少知名人士和政府官員迫於無奈，盡速清除僭建物。一些政黨亦立即加強內部監察，要求黨內議員申報僭建情況。政府因應形勢，表明立場，聲言必定執法之餘，更強調一視同仁，沒有城鄉差異，不會優待丁屋業主。心存僥倖的官員如潘潔和孫明揚，起初還顧左右而言他，企圖敷衍傳媒，避談責任，但眾目睽睽、千夫所指下，窘相畢現，最終也不得不公開認錯。至於屋宇署長，儘管他辯稱其住宅的改建工程已獲該署批核，無須清拆，他也沒有道歉，卻難逃傳媒的批評，指他不避嫌疑，由下屬審批上司申請，有欠公允。

今次僭建風波，足見傳媒的監察力，甚至大於有法定權力的申訴專員。傳媒的監察力看似虛無縹緲，其實是大義凛然，是道義力量的集結，而其起點往往是不畏強權、鞭撻濫權者的調查報道，再由此引發社會共鳴，滙聚民意力量，對準劣紳庸官施壓。大義凛然的調查報道不單單是揭露醜聞，報道事實，而是報道可以喚起人心關注公義的社會實況。

公義任踐踏

如僭建風波，傳媒有力引領民情，關鍵是突顯了社會公義不斷受到挑戰。首先，香港是法治社會，法律面前人人平等，大家引以為榮，但新界不僅有鄉紳自己僭建，更膽敢要求政府只能理順不能執法，而政府又默不作聲，是否變相允許特權？其次，傳媒個多月來揭發了三十多宗達官貴人、鄉紳名流的僭建事件，違規者起初都有恃無恐，特區政府卻若無其事，令人懷疑政府是否失去維護公義的能力？其三，負責執法的部門首長竟然不避嫌疑，讓下屬批核其住所改建工程的申請，是否無視利益衝突，顛覆行之有效的程序公義？其四，問責局長五年前給屬下部門釘契，卻無動於衷，一於懶理政府的警戒，抗命至今，目無法紀。如此紀律不靖、有法不依，特區政府執行的法律還可以當真嗎？
可見，記者不單揭露達官貴人的僭建實情，也讓大家體會隱伏實情背後的更大社會災難──公義任人踐踏、政府束手無策。有說記者只揭社會瘡疤，只懂報道社會陰暗面，做法消極，但這些標籤不能抹殺的是，記者報道僭建問題反映公義受到踐踏，傳媒暴露權貴顛覆秩序揭示公義缺席，正是立足於深植人心、不容侵損否則人人得而誅之的價值共識，其公義訴求力可喚醒民眾正視問題，督促政府撥亂反正，重建社會秩序。記者批判報道表面浮露的叛逆精神，其實是基於對社會核心價值的維護、信守和忠誠。

圖片說明：
Illegal Pink Building StructureBW
新界丁屋僭建三層變五層

入行一年　喜樂比痛苦多

2011-08-19T07:08:00.000-07:00

莊丹娜　《南華早報》記者

[ENG]【記聲2011年8月號】五月的第一個星期天，難得不用上班，與家人吃午餐，無線互動新聞台報導着記協薪酬調查結果，記者協會主席麥燕庭說，受訪記者月薪中位數是12001至15000元的級別，七成半記者的薪酬是二萬元或以下，只有百分之七的薪酬高於三萬元，三成記者打算在兩年內將轉業。

薪酬調查　媽媽有微言

媽媽放下手上的咖啡，眉頭一皺：「哪些老闆有甚麼理由刻薄到如此地步？」

媽媽到一個月後還是不能自已，常常左一句：「那薪酬調查很嚇人。」，右一句：「究竟拿著哪薪水怎麼養家。」小妹已受聘於薪水相對較好的《南華早報》，早已對家母的微言見怪不怪了，也明白她是無心冒犯的，我已經知道她一下句想說：「有十年經驗的薪水也沒有怎麼上升，沒前景啊，不要做吧。」婆婆這時候就會加一句：「對啊，又辛苦，我寧願你打份安安穩穩朝九晚五的寫字樓工！」

我也想到以社會使命感和無可比擬的滿足感這兩個論點去跟她們辯論。縱使她們不會明白，然後就會說一句「嘥氣啦。」薪酬調查仍未幫到我加人工，但已經增添應付家人的壓力。

莊丹娜攝於立法會大樓惜別日

去年六月大學畢業後，我加入《南早》擔任記者至今。剛過去的六月，我收到公司的電郵邀請，總編輯希望跟新記者聚餐，了解他們的工作期望，那一刻有點百感交集。我已不是「新」記者了，只是因為我加入《南早》的頭十個月是按日薪員工條件聘用，所以仍不是《南早》正式員工，雖然我每天在《南早》出入，但我沒有工作證、公司也不會印卡片給我們這些日薪的同事。

到今年四月，我才成為正式月薪員工，看著終於擁有的個人員工證，終於享有有薪假期，有年終薪酬檢討了。第一秒我感動得想哭，下一秒卻在苦笑問：「為什麼要我天天賣命的公司，認同我是他們一份子是那麼困難？又回到老問題，是否我表現太差劣了嗎？」

我是貼近九○年的八十後，那些「年輕人工作態度懶散差劣」的說法聽得太多，還記得剛入職時擔心採主的看法，上級交下任何即日或儲稿命令，我也不會推卻，即使當天身上已纏著十件待辦事情，我也會說﹕「我今晚在家做。」有一段時間，一星期總有數天帶著一堆文件回家，匆匆吃飯後又繼續埋首電腦。我有寫多些報道嗎？沒有，因為這些工作大多是繁多乏味的資料輸入。是因為很熱心工作嗎？也算是，但最重要的原因是缺乏安全感。

對，是怕被炒。

當好記者要持久戰

丟了工作大可再找，更可給媽媽一絲我會轉行的希望。但我頗肯定記者以外找不了如此多變有趣的工作。

對新人來說，記者的工作大開眼界，但挫敗也有很多．．．例如稿件被大幅刪改、棄稿也不會通知我。我也明白「新嚟新豬肉」的道理，有時也質疑自己是否太蠢，文筆太差？我曾發夢看見編輯把我的稿件改得面目全非的整個過程，夢醒時一身冷汗。

我非常認同新記者需要耐心、虛心的學習，假以時日做到好新聞，才能獲得受訪者以至社會的尊重。但我有時候在想，人和人之間最基本的尊重呢？就當退一步，改了或沒了也起碼告知一聲，好嗎？

但回顧這一年，還是喜樂遠比痛苦多。在小妹所在的政治版，有幸得到各前輩關照，也有同期入職的大學同學互相扶持，經驗老到的同事十分照顧，當我有問題不得不打擾他們時，就算他們手上有工作在手時也會不厭其煩地給我指引。今年二月公司週年晚宴，我和三位同事組隊參與才藝表演，一舉奪冠．．．每當想到這一切，我的首年記者生涯其實很幸福，縱使每天面對喘不過氣的工作，家人每週要我轉工的催促。

眨眼就一年了，自覺除了要多看、多聽、多問外，也要加倍努力學習如何和上級相處，盡量不辜負他們期望之餘，也不要讓自己太勞累。因為大學老師和前輩也說過：「當一位好記者是一場持久戰。」所有新入職的行家們，一起加油！互勉之。

為何尼日利亞和蒙古行，香港不行？ --- IFEX會議見聞

2011-08-19T07:06:00.000-07:00

麥燕庭　香港記者協會主席

[ENG]【記聲2011年8月號】「尼日利亞數日前剛通過資訊自由法，正好讓我們分享他們的經驗。」當「國際表達自由交流」組織請來的研討會主持人介紹講者奧浩(EdetaenOjo)時，我不禁納悶：連西非都有四個國家訂定了資訊自由法，為什麼號稱尊重自由、透明施政的香港政府，反而遲遲不願立法保障港人的資訊自由權利？

更令我感到香港落於人後、市民權利保障不足的是，當我從黎巴嫩的會議返港後一星期左右，連毗鄰中國的蒙古(亦稱外蒙，以別於中國境內的內蒙)亦在六月十六日通過《資訊、透明、獲取資訊自由與權利法案》，並定於本年十二月生效。

缺乏資訊自由法保障，香港傳媒較易受擁有大量公共資訊的政府操控。

連蒙古在內，全球現時至少有六十八個國家的人民可以利用資訊自由法向政府索取資料，其中，南非的「資訊自由推動法」更容許國民向私營機構索取資料。

至於仍在法例草擬或國會商議程序的，亦有十數個國家，南美洲的巴西是其中之一。但曾是先行者的香港，現在卻遠遠地落後於國際趨勢。

曾是先行者

在香港記者協會和部分立法會議員推動下，香港於一九九五年通過一分沒有法律約束力的《公開資料守則》，容許市民向政府部門和各級法院與調查小組索閱資料，而且豁免範圍過於廣泛，這雖未盡人意，但至少是開了一個頭：當時全球只有十餘個國家擁有相關法例，甚至是管治香港的英國亦未有就此立法。

隨著時間轉移，《守則》的不足日漸浮現，首先是《守則》的十六大類三十三個細項「可拒絕披露」資料涵蓋太過廣泛，以致很多資料都可以被政府部門或公共機構拒絕提供。

最明顯的佐證是向申訴專員投訴政府拒絕披露資訊的個案日漸上升，宗數由零六年的五宗，上升至零八年的二十五宗，可能是由於投訴上升，申訴專員主動作出調查，並在去年初發表報告，指「儘管《守則》已推行了十多年，職員對條文仍是一知半解，…有些職員在拒絕披露資料時沒有說明理由，或所述理由並無載列於《守則》內」，專員並循此指出培訓和宣傳不足等技術問題，至於守則的內容和不具法律效力的基本問題則沒有觸及。

既然基本缺失未受挑戰，港府自然樂於只是按申訴專員的建議加強宣傳，而不處理訂定資訊自由法的問題，進一步拖慢了港人知情權受法律保障的機會。但這拖延可能很快會受到聯合國人權委員會的挑戰。

未必符合人權公約

人權委員會已於本年四月通過第三十四號「一般意見」草稿，當中指明，《公民權利和政治權利國際公約》第十九條的表達自由條款包含市民可以獲取公共團體資訊的權利，這權利同時賦權新聞工作者獲取公共事務資訊，而普羅大眾則有權接收傳媒報道。

「國際表達自由交流」在黎巴嫩舉行年會暨研討會，與會者交流爭取訂定資訊自由法的經驗。

為了令這種獲取資訊的權利得以落實，人權委員會指出，政府須主動把公眾利益相關的資訊，以簡易、快捷和有效可行的辦法置於公共領域，讓市民可以隨時索閱，製訂資訊自由法是其中一種方法。

人權委員會將於七月中再就草稿舉行會議，相信很快便會通過整分「一般意見」，若香港政府仍拒絕立法，可能會被指違反公約的規定。

除了基本人權須受保障外，資訊自由法亦可營造開放透明的環境，這對營商的重要性，不言而喻。當亞洲區內的日本、台灣、南韓、馬來西亞、印尼和中國大陸都已製訂相關法例，方便商界獲取作出商業決定的資訊時，港府為何仍然甘心落於人後？甘冒把渴求資訊的商人推給其他國家的風險？甚至朝著行事日益隱密的方向發展？

捍衛新聞自由　提升專業的一年　2010/2011年度執行委員會報告

2011-08-19T06:32:00.000-07:00

[ENG]【記聲2011年8月號】香港記者協會捍衛新聞自由的形象一貫是突出的，但在2010/11年度內，相信業界和社會均會認同，記協在爭取業界和會員福利方面的工作同樣觸目，使本會兩大範疇的工作取得更佳的平衡。

在捍衛新聞自由方面，記協就此發出六分聲明、一次記者會、兩次去信中聯辦、一次去信衛生署及跟政府新聞處、警方和消防處官員會面。大部分聲明是回應本港記者於內地進行正常採訪工作時受到無理的打壓和指控，其餘則涉及突發新聞發放及廣告收入影響編採自主等事件。（詳見附表一）

但記協不光是狹隘地捍衛新聞自由，言論自由亦是我們的爭取目標。在本屆任期內，記協為此向當局提交一分意見書、發出兩分聲明、參與一次請願和合辦一次燭光晚會。

孜孜不倦爭取會員福利

作為業界惟一的工會，記協向來把會員福利放在首位。在過去一年，我們舉辦了十二次活動和合辦三項新聞獎，有關活動以提升業界專業水平為目標，也有為學生會員而設的職業講座。首次舉辦的「財經新聞工作坊」吸引超逾一百名記者參與，觀乎參加人數之多，執委會相信，我們是走對了路子。

立足工會立場，記協持續跟進傳媒落實五天工作制的情況，並就新聞工作者的薪酬進行調查及參與五一勞動節遊行，有關調查在業界與社會均引起迥響，本會期望，勞資雙方能對症下藥，紓緩問題，挽留人才，使業界水平得以提升。

記協另一強項是與國際新聞自由和新聞專業組織的緊密關連。除了參與國際或區域組織的聯合行動、派員參加國際組織會議之外，本會更不時應國際組織或使節之邀，簡介香港新聞和言論自由情況，讓他們更瞭解相關發展，主席麥燕庭及榮譽秘書曾錦雯分別參與了國際表達自由交流(IFEX)及國際記者聯盟的會議，而本會每年出版的香港言論自由年報更是國際社會瞭解香港的主要參考文獻。

面對頻繁的工作，記者仍然心繫與會員溝通，當中一項主要工作是定期出版《記者之聲》季刊。本年度已印製四期，最新一期將於八月出版。這本季刊能如期出版，有賴七人編輯委員會和眾多義工努力而成，相信他們的努力，已在讀者的讚賞聲中獲得回報。

會員增長接近一成

由於本會工作得到業界認同，會員人數不斷增加（見表二）。在去年六月下旬現屆執委接任時，本會有439名會員，二月時攀升至590人，增幅超過三成，但其後因部分會員轉行或未能及時繳交會費，以致最新的會員人數降至482人，在去年的高水平上，仍能維持一成的增長，成績仍是可觀的。在此，我們期望來屆執委繼續努力，使會員人數更上層樓，而因為事忙而老是忘記交會費的「過期」會員快快補交會費或重新入會，因為會員人數不單是本會的工作指標，更是本會為大家繼續爭取的力量來源。

總括而言，以一個十二人的執委會和兩名全職員工之力，而能完成以上的工作，除有賴各執行委員的熱誠投入之外，更須感激一眾會員和非會員、業界和非業界的無私奉獻和支持，本會僅向他們致謝。

在來屆，梁頌恩、黃雅斌、任美貞及古治雄等四名執委或因工作轉變或因個人理由，沒有參選本屆的執委選舉，執委會在此向他們致謝，並祝願他們在新工作有更大發揮。

香港記者協會2010/11年度執行委員會
2011年6月25日

表一：記協過去一年就捍衛新聞和言論自由的工作

	聲明/公開信/記者會	意見書	遊行、請願、與官員會面
1	發聲明譴責內地公安，通緝《經濟觀察報》記者，打壓新聞自由 (30/7)	就私隱條例修訂提交意見書 (12月)	與政府新聞處會面，表達對政府濫開吹風會的關注 (9/8)
2	就香港記者採訪撐廣州粵語運動以「擾亂公眾場所秩序」被拘捕，去信中聯辦 (2/8)		與撐港台運動到港台請願 (25/8)
3	發聲明反對政府公布的香港電台《約章》及委任的顧問委員會 (13/8)		到菲律賓駐港領事館遞交請願信．抗議總統阿基諾三世諉過傳媒。（26/8）
4	發聲明反對菲總統阿基諾三世諉過傳媒直播馬尼拉挾持人質事件 (26/8)		與警方會面，商討突發新聞發放問題 (29/10)
5	召開記者會，批評警方不通報突發新聞訊息 (12/9)		與消防處會面，商討突發新聞發放問題（1/11）
6	發聲明祝賀劉曉波獲諾貝爾獎 (8/10)		與支聯會等合辦釋放諾貝爾和平獎得主劉曉波燭光集會 (22/11)
7	去信衛生署，反映署方頻頻深夜發新聞稿 (28/10)
8	就《蘋果日報》被拒採訪亞運，去信中聯辦及亞奧理事會 (19/11)
9	發聲明譴責內地公安，對香港記者採訪遭掌摑視若無睹 (10/12)
10	發聲明就記者採訪茉莉花革命被阻撓，促請中央政府尊重記者的採訪自由 (27/2)
11	發聲明譴責地鐵借抽廣告影響傳媒編採自主 (22/4)

表二：記協截至2011年6月24日會員人數

	正式會員	附屬會員	公關會員	學生會員	退休會員	總數
10-11年度會員人數	331	26	30	85	10	482
10-11年度新會員人數	78	4	6	66	0	152
10-11年度已過期會員人數	54	3	9	50	0	116

為您服務的新執行委員會

2011-08-19T03:37:00.000-07:00

[ENG]【記聲2011年8月號】香港記者協會二零一一至二零一二年度執行委員會選舉經已結束，十二人的執委會已於本年六月二十五日的周年會員大會上誕生，他們將會為各位會員服務，名單如下：

主席 Chairperson
Ms. MAK Yin-ting 麥燕庭

副主席 Vice-chairperson
Ms. Zoe HUNG 孔雪怡

執行委員 Executive Committee
Ms. CHAN Kin-kai 陳健佳
Ms. CHAN Miu-ling 陳妙玲
Ms. Kaman CHEUNG 張嘉雯
Mr. Don GASPER 唐納德
Mr. Stanley LEUNG 梁錦雄
Ms. Maisy LO 盧曼思
Mr. LUI Tsz-lok 雷子樂
Mr. Jackie SAM 岑亞志
Ms. SHAM-Yee-lan 岑倚蘭
Ms. Phyllis TSANG 曾錦雯

記協成員七一參加遊行　捍衛選舉權

2011-08-19T03:36:00.000-07:00

香港記者協會

[ENG]【記聲2011年8月號】約五十名記協會員和支持者響應本會號召上街，表達對立法會議席出缺遞補機制諮詢不足的不滿，亦憂慮有關機制剝奪市民選舉權利，廣義而言，有損市民表達自由。 ( 蔡詠梅攝 )

We joined the rally to expressed their condemnation against the lack of public consultation on the vacancy filling mechanism of Legco. We also worried that the de facto deprivation of voting right by the mechanism weaken freedom of expression in broad term. (Photograph by Choi Wing-mui )

《晴報》面世　壹傳媒加入戰團　免費報業進入戰國時代

2011-08-19T03:35:00.000-07:00

《記者之聲》

[ENG]【記聲2011年8月號】香港第五分免費報章《晴報》在七月二十七日面世後，未有引起公眾太多關注，但卻激起香港銷量三甲之一的《蘋果日報》加入免費報章戰團，有意在月內出版《爽報》，無論《蘋果日報》的舉動會否再引起新的競爭者加入，免費報業市場的競爭肯定將進入戰國時代。

多年來堅持不出版免費報章以免分薄銷路的《蘋果日報》，八月五日突然「自爆」會出版免費報章，令行內人大感意外，奇怪有誰令老闆「占美黎」來個一百八十度轉變？八卦之下，風聞是台灣《蘋果日報》主席葉一堅游說的成果。「堅哥」眼見《晴報》面世，成為香港第四分免費中文報紙，加上英文《虎報》，即接近三成全港報章為免費報章，《蘋果》怎能缺席？一語中的，「占美黎」拍板去馬。

當然，不能缺席的背後，是免費報紙的龐大廣告市場。試想想，連香港經濟日報集團出版的《晴報》在內，免費報章日產二百萬分，數量比收費報章總發行量還多，自然會吸引以銷量為投放廣告主要考量的商人，意味收費報部分廣告日後會琵琶別抱，若不霸佔市場，廣告收益難免會受影響，這可能亦是打動深具商人本色的「占美黎」的原因。

據瞭解，壹傳媒計劃短期內出版的《爽報》，可能會借鏡台灣《蘋果日報》的同名免費報，走社會新聞路線，以便與《蘋果日報》作出區分。每日發行量過百萬分。

至於刺激香港《爽報》面世的《晴報》，首日出紙四十頁，分別是新聞（港聞加中國）九頁、財經四頁、國際三頁，副刊約六頁，而娛樂則是重頭戲，共有八頁。

自從首分免費報章《都市日報》在二○○五年創刊帶動潮流後，到現時的第五分免費報，《晴報》總編輯潘少權表示，相信市場仍有空間，讀者願意閱讀第四分免費報。

至於為何會以《晴報》命名，該報在創刊號指出，面對近年香港出現急劇變化，「我們需要正能量，而非自怨自艾。」《晴報》取名「晴」，表示無論晴天、陰天，還是下雨天，希望讀者們以「日日好心情」積極迎接每天的新挑戰。在內容上，《晴報》走大眾化路線，希望讓讀者覺得新刊物「有趣、易讀和令人愉快」。

對於新聞從業員來說，多一分報紙代表多一些就業機會，但免費報業的成功，又會否進一步威脅收費報章的生存，從而影響現職從業員的在存空間，則要拭目以待。

《南早》招聘大量人手挽士氣

2011-08-19T03:30:00.000-07:00

《記者之聲》

[ENG]【記聲2011年8月號】《南華早報》的高層變動恍如世紀連續劇，持續有新發展。繼來自新加坡的總編輯Reg Chua於３月份離去後，七月流傳2年前與他一同進入《南早》的執行總編輯David Lague亦已告請辭，但仍未聽聞有接任人選，再加上各部組的記者大量流失，情況有點兵荒馬亂。

在過去一季，《南早》的記者離職情況較頻密，除了港聞採訪主任陳旭權離職跳糟馬會任公關外，教育組編輯Liz Heron請辭歸英國老家，政治組記者 Fanny 跳糟《信報》，最令人驚訝的是，作為本港老牌英文大報、尤其針對法律專業讀者的《南早》法庭版，目前只有１名年輕記者，現時署任老總、跑法庭新聞出身的Cliff Buddle 大概也已留意到問題。八月初，《南早》終於刊出招聘大量記者的廣告，除了法庭要補充多個名額之外，醫療、政治、保安、偵查報導都說明要聘請資深記者。

這次招聘人手的舉措，不知能否挽回《南早》的士氣？

2011-08-19T02:55:00.000-07:00

[ENG]

記協主席麥燕庭於晚會上致辭。

主席麥燕庭向榮譽主禮嘉賓香港交易及結算所集團行政總裁，李小加先生送贈一幅漫畫肖像。

李小加先生捐出名為「翠彩精靈」的法藍瓷花瓶，由金利豐金融集團有限公司行政總裁朱李月華女士投得。其他拍賣品如周潤發先生的攝影大作連親筆簽名、顧明均先生捐出的Richebourg – Domaine de la Romanee Conti, 1998 紅酒一支及黎智英先生捐出的家宴，均為記協籌得不少款項。

蕭炯柱先生跟孫允朝先生帶領著青年音樂訓練基金樂團為記協晚會演奏，贏得台下不少掌聲。

前新聞主播柳俊江跟曾志豪以楝篤笑形式論盡傳媒眾生色相，令到會場笑聲不絕。

曾志豪的鬼馬令到李小加笑不攏嘴。

音樂人區新明跟傳媒合唱團唱出前線新聞工作者的心聲。

繆美詩跟楊吉璽為晚會主持，二人令到現場氣氛生色不少。

Police abandon Police General Orders for July 1 confrontation

2011-08-18T23:11:00.000-07:00

Ken Lui - Executive Member, HKJA

[中文][Aug 2011 - The Journalist] After the July 1 demonstration police cleared the area with overwhelming force, arrested more than 200 demonstrators and, in the process, used pepper-sprays to subdue resistance. Some of the reporters on the spot were also roughly handled by the police. At least 19 frontline reporters were pepper-sprayed; some sprayed directly in the face even after identifying themselves to be reporters. Others were pushed, hit by the police and even choked or held down by their heads. One was arrested.

The police on high alert, using pepper spray on demonstrators and reporters

When the police were clearing the area around Central, they extended their blockade to Admiralty during which they deliberately harassed a TV cameraman who had clearly identified himself.

On July 15 the Hong Kong Journalists Association and the Hong Kong Press Photographers Association sent five representatives to meet with the Police Public Relations Bureau to discuss the police mistreatment of reporters, use of excessive force and severely hindering freedom of reporting.

HKJA and the police first discussed the issue of the police blockade.

According to Chapter 39 of Police General Orders police at a crime scene “must act with an attitude of understanding and mutual respect, and do their best to work with the media, and should not try to hinder video-taping by media”.

The Chairperson of HKJA, Ms. Mak Yin-ting, pointed out that while the police were clearing the demonstrators, for a period of time the blockade was unreasonably extended. They were clearing people in Central but the police blockade was extended all the way to Admiralty.

Unreasonable blockade during crowd dispersal.

“Less dogmatism, more flexibility”

HKJA pointed out that during such police action it is not reasonable to impose a blockade larger than necessary. Mak Yin-ting stated that HKJA had consulted human-rights lawyers and their conclusion was that an excessive blockade is tantamount to “confinement”.

Mr Li Kin-fai, Chief Superintendent of PPRB responded by saying that when police took action a blockade must be established, one purpose of which was to separate the people that are involved from those that are not. He also said that when police clear an area, reporters clearly displaying identification will not be arrested. Mak Yin-ting responded immediately that when the reporters cover an event, there is a need for them to stay at the scene to observe, so excessive restrictions are intolerable. “Police cannot expect the reporters to automatically follow your orders to leave. Even reporters working at Zhongnanhai operate under these rules.”
HKJA also tried to discuss the fracas and police harassment of reporters who could clearly prove their identities. One of them was a cameraman of a TV station. He had left his backpack and reporter’s ID inside his company’s vehicle but he was carrying a full-size camcorder with the TV station’s logo when he tried to enter the area. Yet the police insisted that he must show his reporter’s ID before he could be allowed into the blocked off area.

Even though his colleague, a TV reporter, told the police that they were employees of the same station, the police still tried to stop him. He was allowed to enter only after a long argument.

The representatives of HKJA expressed opposition to such police attitudes, saying such situations should be handled with less dogmatism and more flexibility in order not to hinder the work of reporters.

The police representatives insisted that the only way to prove a reporter’s credential was for the reporter to show his proper ID card. A HKJA representative replied that his organization would remind all reporters to carry IDs at work but, nevertheless, expressed disapproval of the bureaucratic attitude of the police.
He said that since the cameraman was carrying a full-sized camcorder with his TV station’s logo, and his colleague had also vouched for him, the police should not have persisted in denying him entry into the enclosed area. “Are you trying to tell me that after all this the police still suspected that person to be a thief who had stolen a TV station’s camcorder to impersonate as a reporter?”

Trainee reporter arrested

The police representative later agreed that this kind of situation should be handled with more flexibility.
During the police operation, at least 19 reporters were pepper-sprayed. An HKJA representative pointed out that while reporters working in such chaotic situation were mentally prepared for such eventualities, and as long as the policemen do deliberately target newsmen, the reporters will not protest. However, he pointed out that during the clearing of demonstrators, some reporters were deliberately pushed and hit by the police, and a reporter from the print media was deliberately sprayed in the face – after identifying himself. Furthermore a number of reporters were subdued by policemen who pushed them down and held them down their heads. HKJA made it clear that such actions were not acceptable.

The police representative said they had not received any information concerning such kind of incidents, and stated that these kinds of actions should not have taken place. If they did, the reporters should file complaints.
The HKJA representative countered that while working at the scene, the reporters’ first priority was to record the situation there, so hardly any of them will waste their time to argue with the police over such issues.
I believe all reporters who had previously dealt with the Independent Police Complaints Council hold a certain degree of doubt about the trustworthiness of the organization.

Another issue raised by HKJA was the arrest of a 19-year-old trainee reporter when police were clearing the demonstration area because she did not carry her reporter’s ID. The police treated her as a demonstrator.
The HKJA representative pointed out that she was arrested while she was standing next to her TV cameraman who was carrying a full-size camcorder, which should have indicated that she was a reporter at work. But the police department representative stated that she was not able to produce an ID and that “at the scene she did not declare that she was a reporter”. The report made by that reporter does not agree with such a statement.

Police media team on-the-spot

The police representative also said the reporter did not declare herself to be a reporter in her statement given to the police. The HKJA representative questioned him immediately if any police officer, who should know the investigation procedure in detail, had given her clear instructions about her rights, and how she could file a complaint if she wanted to?

A day before this meeting, Andy Tsang Wai Hung ,Commissioner of Police replied in public to the questions concerning what happened that evening by declaring that “nobody has special privileges”.

He claimed that all those arrested that evening were people who were believed to have been involved in illegal activities, and alleged that “the attitude of behaving uncooperatively on one hand and using the media to air accusations on the other does not help the investigation”.

During my interview with the trainee reporter she said she had repeatedly informed the police that she was a reporter doing her job yet the police chose to ignore her claims.

After her release, she was only told that she must report back to the police station in December. Nobody told her whether she could or could not provide the police with information concerning her being retained without proper cause in this period of time.

There were numerous instances of reporters being wrongly manhandled during the clearing operation. Joseph Tung, Superintendent of PBRB, who also attended the meeting, said that their media team whose duty was to coordinate action between police and media workers, was at the scene, as they always were when there were activities involving large crowds.

The police employing headlocks and handcuffs, even on reporters. (Photograph courtesy of Ming Pao)

Anyone got through to PPRB yet?

But the HKJA representative questioned the effectiveness of the team's efforts, saying that if the police media team functioned as it was supposed to, there would not have been any undesirable encounters that night.
He asked the police to provide a channel so that there could be immediate communication. This could be just a cell phone number, so that if any conflict arose between police and media workers in future, a member of the police media team could be quickly summoned to settle conflicts.

The reply from the police was that the reporter could call the hotline of the media section of the PBRB.
My question: When was the last time any reporter managed to get through to the PBRB?

Besides the problems of the July 1 demonstration, the representatives of HKJA and HKPPA also complained about the restrictions imposed the media outside Liaison Office of the Central People's Government in the Hong Kong SAR. HKPPA representatives pointed out that recently the police had begun to bar media photographers from the flower boxes area outside the building, which is the best spot for taking pictures. The police have been instructing reporters to take pictures in the area designated for the media which does not directly face the main entrance.

The HKPPA representative pointed out that the reason given by the police was that “it is dangerous to stand behind the flower boxes”, but at the same time, policemen are allowed to stand on the flower boxes to monitor the demonstrators. HKJA expressed its strong protest against this so-called “reason”, which it describes as “unintelligent”, and requested the police department to withdraw this restriction.

The police representative promised that the Western Police Station would follow up on this. Well, we have documented their official reply here. So, let's see.

Translated by Chan Hung-chee

July 1 Protest: Reporters targeted by police

2011-08-18T23:07:00.000-07:00

Ho Wing Hong

[中文][Aug 2011 - The Journalist] I do not have much experience covering large-scale protests. But this year I was one of those at the scene of the scuffles which erupted in the evening of July 1. I was witness to the confrontation between the protestors, police and members of the press.

There were two “war fronts” that evening. I spent more time following People Power's protest at the Bank of China Tower. In fact, when the first protesters walking in front of the rally, which was made up of more than one thousand people, reached Admiralty, the police blockade had already taken shape in front of BOC Tower.

The Police Tactical Unit in formation, surrounding demonstrators opposite the Bank of China Building.

There, PTU members had formed a solid line across the two-way traffic lanes. Many police vehicles were parked behind them. This police formation sent an obvious message to everyone who came by: No crossing this line regardless.

The first question that popped up in my mind was: The People Power protestors are going to Government House, which is farther up the hill. What will happen if they are blocked at the bottom of the hill? Will they simply leave peacefully, after chanting a few slogans?

The protesters of People Power were relatively well organised. They had not planned to confront the police in their thousands. The key players were the several dozens walking ahead of the crowd, all wearing face masks. Together with some prominent legislators, they took up two traffic lanes.

These demonstrators were outnumbered by newsmen on their flanks, mainly photographers jostling for best positions for pictures should scuffles break out. In other words, demonstrators in front kept close to each other to form a front. A considerable number of policemen and reporters were scattered about. I and two other colleagues were walking alongside some police officers.

Red warning raised after pepper sprays

The police at the back first raised two orange coloured banners with the warning: “Police Cordon. Do Not Cross”. Some distance away, police used a loudspeaker to read out the warning. The volume was low, and drowned out by surrounding noise. I could not hear the words clearly, and doubt if anyone else could.
When the scuffles first erupted, it was the protesters and police who confronted each other, with reporters trapped in between. We were being forced to the side, and then pushed back to the centre again by the police.Before I could think of what would happen next, a hot and bitter feeling struck my throat. This was the first shot of pepper spray by the police, which hit all reporters at the front. No reporter went unscathed.

Here came my second query: It was more than obvious that we all were reporters, holding cameras in our hands. So why did the police use force and pepper-spray us?

Four minutes went by. We still had not recovered from our shock. A protester suddenly threw at the police something the size of a fist. This triggered a second round of pepper sprays, my two cameramen and a number of other photographers were shot in their face and body. I was lucky, I only sustained burning pain in my right hand.

A few seconds later, police at the back raised another red banner carrying these words: “Stop Charging, Or We Use Force”. One may question the definition of “force”, or whether it includes the use of pepper sprays. However, police showed the red warning banner only after firing a second round of sprays. Wasn't it a little too late?

Reporters bearing the brunt of police pepper spray.

(Photograph courtesy of Ming Pao)

In the next one hour and more, both People Power protesters and the police calmed down. I was assigned to support colleagues at Connaught Road where police would soon take action to remove members of the League of Social Democrats who were lying on the road and blocking traffic. But we were stopped by the police from proceeding beyond the Hong Kong Club. That area had been declared a restricted zone.

“Cast a wide net, capture all”

We could not show our staff cards, which were left in the company vehicle. But since we were a television reporting crew, our equipment carry the company logo, which identifies us. In spite of that, we were told by the police that no one, including reporters, could enter the area.

Here came my next query. The police had the situation well under control and they had started to remove protesters from the site. Why should they still put up such an extensive restricted zone. Besides us, other reporters were also blocked from entering. We had no choice but to detour to take a longer path through the passenger tunnel near the old Star Ferry Piers to City Hall.

In recent protests, the police have resorted to various tactics to restrain and circumscribe protesters, following up with site clearance and arrests. When protesters refuse to leave or they block the road, the police will encircle them. Even if they later calm down or decide to quit, or are willing to listen to police's call and leave, they will not be allowed to do so. In other words, it is certain that they will be arrested once they are encircled, and will end up in the police station.

Reporters at clearance sites will have to show their staff card before they are allowed to leave. Those who fail to do so will be taken as “demonstrator suspects who attempt to escape from the scene”. This is despite the fact that they are carrying large TV cameras with company logos, and equipment like tripods and ladders. This time, we met with difficult moments negotiating with the police before their commander came on the scene and ordered us to leave.

This also tells the reason why Law Yuk Kai of Hong Kong Human Rights Monitor, who was there as an observer and stayed on that evening until the last minute, was almost taken away by the police near the end of the incident. This is all part of the police's strategy of “casting a wide net to capture all”.

The police may blame the reporters for ignoring the messy situation and hunting news around at the frontlines. But that is precisely the role of the media: to stay at the front, observe and identify those who abuse their freedoms as well as their powers, and to truthfully bring to the attention of the general public events as they unfold out there.

Translated by Melanie Wan

On the frontline: Pepper-sprayed by the police

2011-08-18T23:06:00.000-07:00

Patrick Cheung Ka Ho

[中文][Aug 2011 - The Journalist] On the evening of July 1, I was stricken with grief and gladness at the same time.

I was glad to hear loud and clear Hong Kong people saying no to the government's plan to do away with by-elections to fill vacancies in the Legislative Council.

But I was sad the police had to pepper-spray me and to resort to violence. This made me suddenly realize the ballooning power of the police force.

I was slapped a few times on the face by the police.

(Photograph by Liu Ngan-hung)

What used to be a force that protected members of the public has now degenerated into a machine that only executes orders from the top.

As a "peppered" journalist it is incumbent upon me to give an unvarnished version of what happened that night.

But let me make it clear first that as a young journalist I had come across such malicious tactics by the police during several protests. To be honest I have not been impressed by the approach of the force.

This article is, admittedly, hardly objective. But please allow me to adopt a phrase widely used in local online forum, "Don't like, don't attack", meaning if a reader doesn't like the article, please don't criticize the writer.

There were two big battles that night. I was responsible for covering the march organized by the People's Power party from Wan Chai to Central. In fact, it was extremely quiet along the way without any indication that fierce battles would erupt later.

The marchers sat down for a few minutes after every ten steps. Party members followed the commands of Wong Yuk-man. Policemen kept pace on the side, not saying anything. They allowed the marchers to continue until the reached the Bank of China building.

Slapped on the face

At that point the police suddenly stepped up its guard against the group.

They formed a two-line cordon, with anti-riot police wielding shields in the rear. Further back were several hundred officers standing by as backup. At about 11:30 the front row officers started to tighten the cordon, keeping journalists at bay as well. But the tension then was not high at all. The Police did not issue any warnings, not to say anything about using pepper sprays.

Following a 15-minute standoff with the Police, Wong Yuk-man suddenly ran up to the Police cordon line. A large group of journalists surrounded him. Wong Yuk-man told reporters that they would "walk towards" the Police line, and asked reporters to step back a bit, otherwise they would not be able to film anything.

The proceedings were peaceful – until Wong Yuk-man finished speaking. A large group of People's Power members then began pushing forward. With about 100 protestors surging to the front, about a dozen reporters found themselves carried towards the police line.

At that moment I was pushed by a strong force from behind towards the police line. As soon as physical contact with the policemen happened, the officers pushed me back to the protesters. A scuffle ensued.

I was already waving my press card, clearly telling the officers who I was. I even shouted to the officers: "Those pushing forward are the protesters at the back."

But the officers ignored what I said and shouted back at us, "You, don't mess around." "Try pushing again!" And then: "You are trying to assault police officers!"

Tension among the police was as high as the protesters, if not higher. At the same time, they continued pushing us like they were sumo wrestlers. The police may say this is restrained defensive action, but to me it was "aggressive defence". I was slapped on my face and neck several times that night.

Soon protesters and officers were in a melee, scuffling for about half a minute. Sandwiched between police and protestors, I and several other journalists were crushed to the ground.

Pepper sprays most effective

I was about to get up to tell the police that there were journalists caught in the scuffle. But in that split second, an officer in the third row of the police cordon suddenly fired pepper sprays at me. I was trying to focus on identifying ourselves to the officers in the front row so I didn't hear any warnings from other officers. I didn't know that they would resort to using weapons. As I was totally unaware of the situation, my hair, eyes, mouth and neck were "completely peppered".

I must say, though, that the pepper sprays were most effective. I could not open my eyes at all and lost vision for about five minutes. Luckily, an officer pulled me out of the melee, and kept pouring water on me so that I recovered my vision.

After that, I walked up to the officer who sprayed me to identify myself as a journalist. I asked him why he used pepper sprays on me and why there was no advance warning. But he only said: "I don't care. I only saw you clashing with us.”

Much later I watched some footages and found that while the police were using pepper sprays, they were unfurling a warning banner at the back. But there were over 100 people massed together at that very moment. Many journalists and protesters had already fallen down. In such a chaotic moment who would notice a little banner being raised at the back? And the police have no evidence to show they had issued a warning "in advance".

This is not the first time that journalists have been treated violently by the police. Last year when government officials hit the streets to promote its "Act Now" campaign, the police also considered journalists as protesters, blocking us as much as they could. The question is: Does the police respect press freedom?

Journalists do not enjoy any special privileges. But this does not mean officers can use violence against members of the public and journalists. I was caught between the police and protesters that night.

Apart from describing my personal experience, I have found a few video clips about what happened that night. Hopefully they will the gaps in my report.

Hyperlinks:

Footage 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4oG4boHquQ（04:50、08:40）

Footage 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3xZ793b5UY

Footage 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqfItr0HV-4

Translated by Altis Wong

Photo-journalist: “Why was I roughed up?”

2011-08-18T23:05:00.000-07:00

Liu Ngan Hung

[中文][Aug 2011 - The Journalist] I have covered many large-scale demonstrations during my seven years as a photo-journalist, but in recent times the police have tightened the net when dealing with protesters as the number of scuffles have risen.

The chances of journalists getting hurt have also increased. What happened on the evening of July 1 is a clear example. That night, journalists were among those who were pepper-sprayed by police officers.

More than 100 police officers were deployed outside the Bank of China Building to block protesters from the People Power group when the procession got there.

Like the few dozens journalists there at the time I tried to find the best position to take pictures near the protesters who had indicated they would charge the police lines.

That was how journalists were trapped between the police line and the protesters who linked arms as they prepared to charge.

Soon the scuffle between the two groups began, and I saw both protesters and policemen falling down during the melee.

As the situation deteriorated with water bottles smashing into their ranks, the police went into the offensive to regain control. I saw some journalists being pushed away by the police.

Reporters bearing the brunt of police pepper spray. (Photograph courtesy of Ming Pao)

Resort to pepper spray

When the police resorted to using pepper spray, not only policemen, but some journalists who were trapped between the two sides also became accidental victims.

I was one of them and, fortunately, despite feeling the burning sensation on my face, my eyes were not affected and I could continue my work. However, many colleagues were not so lucky and they had to rinse their eyes in spite of the pain inflicted on them during the police action.

While I was preparing to continue taking pictures, a policeman approached came in front of me, grabbed me by my shoulders, and tried to press me down until I lost my balance and fell.

He kept on pushing me down in spite of my repeatedly shouting that I was a journalist, though I had not prominently displayed my press card.

Although I was not hurt, I felt helpless since I knew well it was futile to argue with the policeman. The only thing I could do was to get up and get on with my work.

I understand that prominently displaying the press card during civil unrest may assure a certain level of protection, but the police should have been fully aware that there was a group of journalists holding cameras and doing their work in the crowd.

What drove the policeman to treat me so violently?

That night I was only taking pictures as part of my journalistic coverage and had not posed a threat to anyone. To my knowledge, the police treated some cameramen even more violently, and some photo-journalists claim they were beaten up by policemen in the chaos.

Need for flexibility and mobility

What I could not understand was how there could have been any difficulty for the police to identify journalists who were carrying heavy photographic equipment.

I also question the failure of the police to adhere to the principle of providing assistance to journalists in covering the news – a principle the police have always claimed to follow.

Was it just a matter of miscommunication with the enforcers in the frontline, or has there been a change in principle?

The same situation will be repeated at every large-scale demonstration in the future if this problem is not addressed.

Officers from the Community Relations Bureau only arrived at the scene at the later stage of the protest when police were removing protesters one by one.

Only at this point was the smooth journalistic operation restored. While I am aware of the uniqueness of every situation due to the ever-changing circumstances in demonstrations, from the journalist’s point of view I only wanted to make a photographic record of the event rather than being an adversary of the police.

Journalists do not want privileges. We only want the police to understand that photo-journalists cannot be kept in designated positions while doing our jobs, especially during volatile situations in large-scale demonstrations.

It is necessary for journalists to remain flexible and mobile in order to take photographs.

Translated by Ambrose Leung

Arrested - a humiliating experience as a police suspect

2011-08-18T23:04:00.000-07:00

Kiri Choy, New Tang Dynasty Television Internship

[中文][Aug 2011 - The Journalist] Journalism had me captivated while I was still a student. But it was not till I became an intern reporter that I began to understand the difficulties of upholding human values, especially in a money-oriented society.

The media itself is facing a massive challenge too, with some forced to give way at the expense of the public interest. It is absolutely important that the diversity of voices must not be choked.

When a high-ranking and powerful person speaks untruths,
we can only counter him with the truth.

With this thought in mind I set out to be the reporter to bring out the unvarnished truth. So I joined the New Tang Dynasty TV – a financially and politically independent TV station.

So on July 1 I went out to cover the annual protest march with precisely that purpose in mind: reporting the truth.

By evening many people had gathered at Connaught Road Central. I got there at 11 pm.

The police had linked arms, with the protesters completely surrounded. I had difficulty shooting pictures from outside the police cordon. An officer saw my difficulties and instructed two of the men to delink arms and let me through.

The two policemen did so and I got into the cordoned off area. I stayed there, shooting away till all the protesters were removed.

Fingerprinted and photographed

I did not sit down for a single moment while the whole operation was going on. After all the protesters had been removed, the commanding officer shifted his attention to where I was – with a whole bunch of journalists who had been – and still were busy recording the whole operation. He ordered his men to round up all the reporters and take them back to the police station, except those holding press cards. An officer asked for proof from a man next to me, and then he was gone. I was the next one queried. I said I was a reporter, but had forgotten to bring my press card due to a rush. The commander insisted that I be taken away. So I had to get into a police vehicle. It was 2 am.

The officer looking after me said a letter of confirmation faxed from my company would save me a lot of trouble. So I did as I was told and called colleagues to send the necessary confirmation. Two hours later the Aberdeen Division received the letter.

I asked if I could go but the officer said it depended on the CID. I asked how long I needed to wait. She said she did not know.

It was not until 6 am that I was told that I needed to give an affidavit. The policewoman keeping an eye on me told the affidavit officer that I had given proof of my status with a company document that said I was a reporter. Instead of questioning me about the previous evening's activities he asked for more personal information as well as my signature for the record.

After this was done there was more waiting. Then I was taken to an office for fingerprinting. I refused to sign the approval letter for this. But a police officer told me the fingerprinting and the letter of approval were unrelated. The former was necessary but the latter was for other personal information.

I had been cheated. I signed the approval letter. The officer also pressed my fingers to record their prints as well as that of the palms.

Finally I was taken to another office for front and side-view photographs while holding an A4-sized card with a serial number on it. I felt like I was being treated as a suspect throughout the whole process. It was thoroughly insulting.

Peace of mind in spite of accusations

I spent another two hours with the others who had been arrested and were awaiting bail. The officer in charge of me said I would have to pay a sum of money for bail, and asked how much I had on me at that moment. Then the officer told everyone we could go after signing the bail documents. I tried to argue why I did not want to sign but the effort was in vain. I ended up leaving at 11 am on July 2.

“Never go to these places to report again,” the arresting officer had seriously told me in the police car. Although I did not understand the link between her and my choice of reporting I, nevertheless, told her boldly: “I am going next time – with a press card with me – ok?” She was speechless.

People concerned about me have asked if I would give up journalism after such an experience. My reply was: “I will continue to do what must be done.”

For those who have chosen to give up, why did they begin on this journey to tell the truth in the first place? The biggest loss to society is when people who should fear are fearless while people who should stay the course courageously are overwhelmed by irrational fears.

My own beliefs have given me peace of mind and helped me to withstand groundless accusations. Why should I be afraid when I have not done anything wrong? The truth cannot be changed just because some people want it changed. Besides those eyewitnesses at the scene, there is also the sky and the earth to be my witnesses.

I suffered from the pressure. I only had truth with me when someone of high standing in society publicly departed from the truth and accused me for being one of the protesters. Hence this truthful account of what actually happened that night.

I sighed when I was sitting in the police station and looking around. What was I here for? I knew the answer too well. I was not here for myself. I was here for the people.

I hope you have benefited from this truthful account of what really happened that night.

Media unite to spotlight the wrongs of the rich and famous – CE not excluded

2011-08-18T22:17:00.000-07:00

Alvin Wong - Reporter, Apple Daily

[中文][Aug 2011 - The Journalist] In his report in April, the Ombudsman strongly criticised both the Lands and Buildings departments for failing to take legal action against unauthorized structures of New Territories small houses. In fact, the Ombudsman had raised this issue repeatedly every few years but had never drawn public attention.

Recently, however, the issue made a heavy impact, setting off a chain effect that swept up a number of top officials, politicians, celebrities and even Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen.

Public discussion initially focused on the privileges enjoyed by the villagers but went on to include urban dwellers.

The Chief Executive’s entire balcony walled in with glass panels is unlawful.

The response from the rural committee was formidable. At first it tried to negotiate with the government to rationalize this problem of illegal structures. But it turned out that they just wanted to justify the situation and to make it lawful.

Even after the compromise by Secretary for Development Carrie Lam, giving some leeway to small houses built after 1972, some villagers still tried to pressure the government into legalizing those unlawful structures by putting up a variety of reasons to justify their positions.

But the controversy created a surprising consensus among the media. Both print and electronic media joined hands to show the full extent of this problem of illegal structures. As layers of illegality were peeled off senior officials and celebrities also came under the spotlight. Under enormous pressure from the media the government was forced to tackle a problem it had left untouched for many years.

Apple Daily led the way with an investigative story on the illegal structures put up by lawmaker Chan Kam-lam. It started with a complaint against an unidentified legislator for abuse of power by putting up his own structures on government land. The paper subsequently identified the lawmaker as Chan. Further investigations found Chan had also put up illegal structures on his own property.

Michael Suen simply ignored the fact that his residence had an illegal structure.

Instead of waiting for the government to provide the necessary information the newspaper took the initiative to invite engineers and building experts to assess and verify that some structures in Chan’s house were illegal.
The investigation into Chan’s property did not end the issue because other outlets followed up with their own investigations on the properties of other rich and famous. Notables brought into the limelight were Wong Kwok-hing, Mainland and Constitutional Affairs Secretary Stephen Lam, Financial Secretary Henry Tang and, eventually, the chief executive himself.

Uncertainties and confusion

The saga came to a climax when core members of the SAR administration Kitty Poon and Michael Suen were shown to have blatantly breached the buildings regulations. It was simply outrageous that Suen who was the housing and planning chief at the time had completely ignored the order issued by his own department against the unlawful structures in his apartment.

That same day the chief executive's property on MacDonnell Road was found to have its balcony illegally enclosed. His core officials were also found to have similar breaches of the law on their properties.
Others breaching the law included the father of Chief Secretary Henry Tang and Executive Committee member Dr Leong Che-hung.

The chief executive initially tried to put up a defence. After an urgent day-long meeting, the Buildings Department confirmed that the structure in Tsang’s flat was unlawful and needed to be removed. It is, perhaps, likely that Tsang, like many owners of old apartments are unfamiliar with building regulations.
In most instances unlawful structures came to light upon reports by people. But this problem is so extensive and so prevalent that people started to lose sight of it until the issue was widely reported by the media in recent months.

The media, nevertheless, went to considerable lengths to identify owners and verify ownership of the properties and other details after being tipped off by readers. Most tip-offs provided only brief details in a sentence or two, like “Stephen Lam’s flat has unlawful structures.” It was the effort of the media to identify the properties and to dig out floor plans of other units as well as pictures of the building’s previous conditions to make the necessary comparisons.

The Buildings Ordinance (1984) allowed exceptions to flats owners to enclose their balconies under certain conditions. But those exceptions were abolished in 1992, creating uncertainties and confusion in the minds of many people. In most cases, media sought confirmation of apartment-owners about the allegations of unlawful structures.

Some, but not all flat owners, were frank about their breaches of the building regulations. Albert Cheng initially baffled the media about the structures in his luxury property on the Peak after the former radio host denied the structure was unlawful and even claimed that the reporter was mistaken. The problem eventually was confirmed after the reporter sought confirmation from the Buildings Department which simply said the structure had never been legally approved.

Translated by Patsy Moy

Illegal structures scandalize highest levels of government

2011-08-18T22:09:00.000-07:00

To Yiu Ming

[中文][Aug 2011 - The Journalist] The recent saga surrounding the illegal structures in the homes of politicians and top government officials has been more eye-catching than the news about the post-80s top earners.

This 'small house' for indigenous resident of the New Territories
turned out to be five stories instead of three as stipulated by law.

For the former, the senior officials who have blatantly defied the law and corrupted political morality has further damaged the accountability of the SAR Government – the administration which its already struggling with its low popularity rating and appalling credibility.

The controversies were stirred up by a report from the Ombudsman in April which was critical of the prevalence of unauthorised building structures in the New Territories. Further probes by the media showed that some village leaders, lawmakers and other public figures had also put up unauthorized structures in their homes. It was shocking to find Undersecretary for the Environment Kitty Poon Kit herself was also on the list.

A wave of intensive media investigations has brought us to the conclusion that the problem of unauthorized structures has been grossly under-estimated. It is not confined to specific districts. In reality, the problem is city-wide and involving some of the most high-end districts, such as the Peak. The community was shocked to find that the problem involved not only the rich and famous, but also those who are at the highest levels of the administration – heads of the policy bureaus, secretaries (ministers), executive councillors and even the Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen himself.

Bright side of the issue

The most intriguing part was the involvement of Director of Buildings Au Choi-kai and Secretary for Education Michael Suen Ming-yeung. Au is the head of the department which is tasked with cracking down on unauthorized structures. Suen was the Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands when an order was imposed on his property.

The impact of the media scrutiny is significant. Not only did the news coverage put pressure on those public figures to remove the unlawful structures from their properties, the government was also forced to send a message – loud and clear – about its determination to crack down on unauthorized structures regardless of the owner's social standing and background. Various political parties also stepped up scrutiny among their members, requesting them to report any unlawful structures in their homes.

Also under intensive public pressure, Kitty Poon and Michael Suen, who had tried to throw off blame, eventually made a public apologies for their errors. However, Au continued to defend his position. How could the public possibly believe that officers from Au’s own department could act fairly in assessing his case and eventually exempting him from statutory building restrictions?

However, we should also look on the bright side of the issue. Although journalists do not enjoy the same legal powers as the Ombudsman, the strength of their scrutiny proved to be very strong in drawing public attention to such wrongs, upholding justice, and consolidating the power of Hong Kong people to oversee the conduct of senior officials.

Government unable to uphold rule of law

The saga has brought up several key issues: Firstly, the controversy gave rise to concerns about the rule of law under which everyone should be equal. However, the government was silent when some villagers sought to justify their breach of the building rules. So, does the government’s attitude amount to giving special privileges to those people?

Secondly, Hong Kong people have started to question the ability of the government to uphold justice when it closes one eye selectively to blatant breaches of the law by certain privileged groups in society.

Thirdly, how could it be justified for the department to assess an application by its own director to change the building structure of his property in spite of rules already laid down? The whole process has completely ignored the conflict of interest and the principle of fairness.

Fourthly, how could it possible for a minister to completely defy a warning about the illegal structures on his property issued by his own department?
The investigation by the media disclosed more than just the extent of the problem of illegal structures. It also effectively alerted the public to a more serious social ill – the violation of justice and the inability of the government to uphold the law. Behind the news reports, the press has carried out its proper function of drawing public awareness to these wrongs, putting pressure on the government to return to the correct path and helping rebuild social order.

Translated by Patsy Moy

The joys of breaking into journalism

2011-08-18T22:02:00.000-07:00

Tanna Chong - Reporter, South China Morning Post

[中文][Aug 2011 - The Journalist] On May Day afternoon while lunching with my family, Journalist Association chairwoman Mak Yin-ting was speaking on television about the latest pay survey. Ms Mak said they interviewed journalists’ median income lies on the HK$12,001 – HK$15,000 group, where three-quarters of the respondents earn less than HK$20,000. Only seven percent of them earn more than HK$30,000, but 30 per cent of them plan to leave the media industry within two years. My mother put down her cup of coffee, troubled: “Just why those bosses have to exploit reporters to this extent?”

Tanna on Lecgo Building

One month then passed but the same amount of confusion and anxiety surrounded my mother. “Those figures were horrible”, “how could people feed themselves and their families with that amount of money” were her catchphrases of the month. It went beyond doubt that the newspaper I work in –South China Morning Post – offers a better pay. But I am sure she meant nothing offensive, as her next line was: “There is virtually zero pay rise even for those who have 10 years of experience. There is no prospect. Let’s quit.” Then grandmother chipped in: “True! And I prefer you working an eight-hour office job!”

Two rebuttals popped up: journalism brings one immense satisfaction and sense of commitment to the society. But I did not utter them to start a debate, as I knew they would then say in annoyance: “Just save your effort to argue.”

My journalistic career at the Post began after I obtained my Bachelor’s degree in June last year. Last month, I received an email invitation from the company for lunch with the Chief Editor and to share my expectations of my job.

My immediate reactions were mixed. I was no longer a “newcomer”. For the past 10 months I had been just a casual, daily-rated worker. Not being on the permanent staff I did not have my own working pass, although I went through the same company gate every day as the rest of the staff. Nor did I have my own business cards – I needed to hand-write my particulars on blank cards.

I was only promoted to be a monthly-paid permanent staff in April. Eventually I was given a pass with my headshot on it, received paid annual leave and a year-end appraisal. I almost cried thinking about all these. But I ended up asking myself: “Why was the road so steep for me in order to be recognised by the company? My incapability?”

I am among those who are almost a part of the “Post-90’s” generation. Having heard a lot of criticisms against the lax and arrogant working attitudes of the young people in this generation I tried my very best to satisfy my boss’ demands – I was just panicky that my seniors might consider me cocky and inept. Whatever the bosses wanted – whether daily or packaged stories – I never said no. Even when I was extremely tied up I would say: “Let me do it at home tonight”. In my early days I took piles of papers home, put them aside for a quick and then buried my head in them before staying by the computer till late into the night.

So, did my output increase? No, those works were mainly tedious information input. Was I passionate about work? Sort of. But the real reason was simply lack of job security.

Yes, I was afraid of getting the boot.

I am quite sure my mother would have been more hopeful if I was fired, as it would have meant leaving journalism. But I am more certain I would not find another job from which I would learn as much, and enjoyed as much.

Having one’s horizon widened is one of joys for a new journalist. But the setbacks are equally frustrating. Stories are massively edited or simply spiked without any prior warning. I understand the need for a newcomer to be broken in, but I sometimes cannot help thinking if I might have been too dumb and incapable. I once dreamt of a story of mine being drastically changed. I woke up in a cold sweat.

I totally agree with the view that fresh journalists have to be patient and humble, before one can turn in stories that win the respect of both interviewees and the society. But I sometimes think about this as well: “How about basic respect among workmates? At the very worst can't I be notified when my story has to be drastically altered or spiked? Please?”

In the end, however, the joys still surpass the nuisance during my freshman year as a journalist. Now, as I work the political beat I cannot be more grateful for the care from seniors as well as my undergraduate classmates. I am also thankful for the endless guidance given by my experienced colleagues – no matter how hectic they were when I approached for help. This February, I joined the company’s talent show with three of my dear colleagues and our team was voted the top team…I am among the luckiest reporters who have the best starting year! This is despite the suffocating work and family pressures I face every day.

So a fruitful year has passed. I see my own shortcomings and am trying every means to improve. I also realize the need to learn the art of communicating with my superiors. Not only should I avoid falling short of their expectations, I should also avoid being overwhelmed by fatigue. “It is a long battle to be an outstanding journalist,” so I was told by university teachers and seniors.

I wish all young reporters the best. We should all strive hard together.

Mongolia and Nigeria can have it but not Hong Kong...Why?

2011-08-18T22:01:00.000-07:00

Mak Yin-ting - HKJA Chairperson (reflecting on the recent IFEX conference)

[中文][Aug 2011 - The Journalist] “Nigeria just passed the Freedom of Information Act few days ago. We are pleased to have Edetaen Ojo, Executive Director of Media Rights Agenda (MRA) in Lagos, to share his experience with us.”

Lacking statutory protection for access to information, Hong Kong media

is more vulnerable to the manipulation of government which holds a huge

amount of public information.

When the conference host of the International Freedom of Expression Exchange (IFEX) made this introduction, I immediately wondered why Hong Kong, which claims to respect freedoms and openness, refuses to enact such a legislation to protect people’s right to know, while four West African countries have done so.

I got more angry a week later as I headed home from Beirut, Lebanon, when I learnt that the Mongolian parliament had also passed a law on Freedom of Information, Transparency, Right and Freedom to Access Information on June 16. This law will take effect in December.

Including Mongolia there are now at least 68 countries which have enacted legislation giving their citizens access to information in the public domain. South Africa's Promotion of Access to Information Act even allows people access to information held by the private sector.

There are a dozen similar legislations before other parliaments or in the process of being drafted. Brazil is one of them.

But, once a pioneer in legislating freedoms, Hong Kong has dropped behind the global trend.

Challenge by UN body

With the joint effort of HKJA and some legislators, the government promulgated the Code on Access to Information, an administrative code that is not legally binding. It sets out the types of information held by departments and the courts that must be made available to the public as a matter of routine or in response to a request. Apart from the lack of any legally binding power, the code has been criticised for the many exemptions allowed. Despite these defects, however, it still represented a beginning in allowing access to information. It was tolerable at the time because only a few dozen countries or so had enacted such legislation. Even the United Kingdom, the then sovereign power over Hong Kong, had not enacted any Freedom of Information Act and would not be doing so till the year 2000.

Participants at IFEX meeting in Lebanon exchanging views on how to fight for enactment of access to information legislations.

With the passage of time the disadvantages of the existing code are becoming harder to ignore. First, any request for information in 33 areas under 16 categories may be refused, its existence denied or not confirmed. With such a wide range of exemptions a lot of information can obviously be withheld by departments and public bodies.

Another pertinent fact is that complaints to the Ombudsman are on the rise. There were just five complaints in 2006. This figure rose to 25 in 2008. This increase may well be the reason why the Ombudsman subsequently decided to investigate how the code on access to information was working. The Ombudsman was critical of the implementation of the code: “The cases … illustrate deficiencies among certain departments, displaying considerable misunderstanding of the provisions and unfamiliarity with the procedural requirements of the Code after well over a decade of implementation. Some have refused requests for information without giving any reason or with reasons not specified in the Code”.

Neighbours have guaranteed access

The Ombudsman pointed to the inadequate training and publicity given to the code. Regrettably, the basic deficiencies of lack of statutory protection and the overly narrow scope of application of the code are not dealt with.

The government felt it prudent to leave the code alone while only intensifying the publicity work. This sluggish introduction of statutory protection not only delays the benefits of the right to know for Hong Kong people but may also come under challenge by the Human Rights Committee of the United Nation.

The Human Rights Committee finished reviewing its Draft General Comment No. 34 on Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in April. In the reviewing General Comment, it states that “Article 19, paragraph 2 embraces a right of access to information held by public bodies.” It further says, “the right of access to information includes a right whereby the media has access to information on public affairs and the right of the general public to receive media output.”

To give effect to the right of access to information, the General Comment goes on to say: “...states parties should proactively put in the public domain government information of public interest. States parties should make every effort to ensure easy, prompt, effective and practical access to such information. States parties should also enact the necessary procedures, whereby one may gain access to information, such as by means of freedom of information legislation.”

The Committee will continue its second reading in Geneva from 11 to 29 July. It is expected that the General Comment may be passed soon. If the Hong Kong government refuses to legislate by then, it may be challenged for deviating from the ICCPR rules.

Access to information ensures enjoyment of basic human rights and the cultivation of an open and transparent political environment. Needless to say, it is vitally important to the business community. Our neighbouring countries in Asia, namely, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia, Indonesia and Mainland China have enacted legislation to guarantee access to information to facilitate business circle in decision-making. The Hong Kong government’s sluggishness in enacting such legislation risks pushing businessmen to neighbouring countries.

Year in balance: Defending press freedom, promoting members’ interests

2011-08-18T01:07:00.000-07:00

Hong Kong Journalists Association

[中文][Aug 2011 - The Journalist] The Hong Kong Journalists Association has long been known for its rigorous defence of press freedom and the freedom of expression. In 2010/11 HKJA also intensified efforts to enhance the interests of its members as well as the media industry as a whole. This was generally acknowledged by the public at large. The eventful year saw a much better balance in the two main spheres of our work.

On safeguarding press freedom, HKJA issued six statements, organized one press conference, wrote two letters to the Liaison Office and one letter to the Department of Health, in addition to meeting with officials from ISD, the Police and Fire Services Department. Most of the statements issued were in protest against the suppression of journalistic works and unfounded allegations made by the Mainland government. Others were about the information release mechanism for spot news and an attempt to influence the media by withdrawing advertisements. (See Table 1)

However, HKJA has not and will not focus its mind narrowly on press freedom alone. We also strive for freedom of expression in general. During the year under report, HKJA made one submission, issued two statements, participated in one petition presentation and co-hosted a night’s vigil in pursuit of this fr eedom of expression.

Striving for Welfare of Members

HKJA, as the only trade union in the industry, puts considerable effort into fighting for the welfare of its members. This is a matter of paramount importance, notwithstanding the efforts put into the struggle for freedom of expression in general and press freedom in particular which have broader appeal to the general public. In the past 12 months, we organized a dozen activities and co-organized three press awards.

Those activities aim to enhance professionalism, provide light relief and exercise, as well as strengthen ties between members and public figures of interest and importance to journalists and their work. The “Greenhorn Financial Workshop” launched for first time was a great success with more than 100 reporters participating. Judging by the popularity of the activities, the Executive Committee believes that we are headed in the right direction.

HKJA, as a trade union, has pursued the implementation of the five-day week in the industry. We also conducted a salary survey and participated in the May Day March. The survey drew wide attention from society as well as the media industry. We hope that the managements and the frontline journalists will work out methods together to resolve problems so as to encourage talented people to stay on. As a result, quality of news reporting can be upgraded.

Strong links with international organizations is another achievement, though not attention-grabbing, of our JA. Apart from participating in international and regional campaigns, sending representatives to attend international conferences, we also briefed foreign guests, at their request, on freedom of expression in Hong Kong. Chairperson Mak Yin-ting and Honorary Secretary Phyllis Tsang attended two international conferences organized by the International Freedom of Expression Exchange (IFEX) and the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ). In this regard the annual report on freedom of expression is regarded by the international community as important reference material in understanding Hong Kong.

Another perennial work of JA is the publication of The Journalist. We published four issues. The latest one will be delivered in August. It is the valuable efforts of the seven members of the Editorial Board and volunteers who ensure the periodical is produced on time. Their efforts have drawn compliments from readers.

Ten Percent Jump in Membership

The efforts of HKJA have been recognized by our fellow reporters and have encouraged journalists to join our ranks. (See table 2). Our membership reached a peak last February with 590 members, representing a 34 percent jump from 439 members when we took office last June. However, with some members failing to renew their membership, our latest membership stands at 482 which represents nearly 10 percent increase over last June's membership. With last June's high mark to start with, a 10 percent increase cannot be sniffed at. We hope the incoming Executive Committee will keep up the good work and take our membership to a new high. We also urge those who allowed their membership to lapse through inadvertently failing to pay membership fees to pay up or renew their memberships. It has to be known that membership is the yardstick of our work. Also, it is the source of strength in our continued struggle for the betterment of our whole industry.

In all, JA completed all these works with only two full time staff and 12 Executive Committee members because of the enthusiasm of executive committee members and the selfless contribution and support of all our members and non-members from media and non-media sectors. We extend our sincere gratitude to them all.
Owing to personal reasons or because they are leaving the media industry, Ambrose Leung, Albert Wong, Shirley Yam and Alex Koo are not participating in the election. The Executive Committee is grateful for their contributions in the past year and wishes them great success in their new careers or new chapter in their life.

The 2010/11 Executive Committee
The Hong Kong Journalists Association
25th June 2011

Table 1：Work Related to Freedom of the Press and Expression

	Statements/Letters/Press Conferences	Submission	Marches/ Petitions/Meetings
1	Condemn mainland police for putting Journalist on ‘most wanted’ list (30/7)	Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance Amendment	Meet ISD: off the record” briefings (9/8)
2	Letter to the Liaison Office: the detention of reporters in Guangzhou (2/8)		Petition at RTHK with Save RTHK Campaign (25/8)
3	Statement: Editorial Independence of RTHK (13/8)		Meet Police: Spot News Release (29/10)
4	Statement: Concern over President Benigno Aquino's words (26/8)		Meet Fire Services Department: Spot news Access (1/11)
5	Press Conference: Access to spot news information (12/9)		Night vigil: Release Liu Xiaobo (22/11)
6	Statement: Lu Xiao Bo awarded the Nobel Prize (8/10)
7	Letter to Department of Health: Press releases distributed at mid-night. (28/10)
8	Letter to Liaison Office: Apple Daily was rejected to cover Asian Games (19/11)
9	Statement: Journalists of Hong Kong was being slapped (10/12)
10	Statement: Jasmine Revolution (27/2)
11	Statement: Condemn the MTR (22/4)

Table 2 Membership on 24 Jun 2011

	Full	Associate	PR	Student	Retired	Total
Membership at 10-11	331	26	30	85	10	482
New Members at 10-11	78	4	6	66	0	152
Expired Membership at 10-11	54	3	9	50	0	116

The New Excom That Serves You

2011-08-16T11:42:00.000-07:00

[中文][Aug 2011 - The Journalist] The election of the Hong Kong Journalists Association was completed and the 2011/2012 Executive Committee was born in the Annual General Meeting held on 25th June 2011. The new Executive Committee that serves you this term are as follows:

主席 Chairperson
Ms. MAK Yin-ting 麥燕庭

副主席 Vice-chairperson
Ms. Zoe HUNG 孔雪怡

執行委員 Executive Committee
Ms. CHAN Kin-kai 陳健佳
Ms. CHAN Miu-ling 陳妙玲
Ms. Kaman CHEUNG 張嘉雯
Mr. Don GASPER 唐納德
Mr. Stanley LEUNG 梁錦雄
Ms. Maisy LO 盧曼思
Mr. LUI Tsz-lok 雷子樂
Mr. Jackie SAM 岑亞志
Ms. SHAM-Yee-lan 岑倚蘭
Ms. Phyllis TSANG 曾錦雯

HKJA in July 1 march

2011-08-16T10:43:00.000-07:00

Hong Kong Journalists Association

[中文][Aug 2011 - The Journalist] Around fifty reporters responded to JA's call and participated in the July 1 march.

Free-for-all in the mud with yet another freebie coming on-stream

2011-08-16T06:28:00.000-07:00

[中文][Aug 2011 - The Journalist] A new Chinese tabloid hit the market on July 27. Sky Post, published by the Hong Kong Economic Times Group (HKET), is the fifth free daily in the city and the fourth in Chinese. Almost one third of the newspaper market is now taken up by freebies with their combined circulation of two million copies a day, more than the total of paid newspapers.

This huge jump may draw more advertising revenue. It has certainly pushed the Next Media Group which owns Apple Daily, one of the top three newspapers in terms of circulation, to enter the freebies battlefield.

This newbie to be called Sharp Daily, is aiming for a daily circulation of more than one million. To differentiate it from the paid Apple and avoid dragging down its circulation, Sharp Daily will be out on its own.

The newcomer will not merely be threatening its own sister. Its going to drag every one into the mud for a free-for-all.

HKET’s Sky Post has targeted the young people with a mix of current affairs, entertainment and style.Although the freebie market is highly competitive, Sky Post is expected to make the advertising pie larger.

Sky Post's predecessor was Take me Home, a free district-based weekly. The Chinese name of Sky Post is “Ching Po”, meaning Sunny Paper. Its editors say they hope readers will feel sunny after reading it.

Strictly speaking, journalists welcome more newspapers as it means more job opportunities. But it remains to be seen whether the success of free papers will further erode the development of paid newspapers and thus threaten the job security of some journalists.

Posting all things bright and beautiful..at the Post

2011-08-15T12:11:00.000-07:00

[中文][Aug 2011 - The Journalist] It looks like Editor-in-Chief Reginald Chua who quit his job at the South China Morning Post after a mere six months has set off a walk-out fashion. Following in his heels: his deputy David Lague, News Editor Quinton Chan (now horsing around at the Hong Kong Jockey Club),Education Editor Liz Heron, all the political, crime and investigative reporters.

Current Acting Editor-in-Chief Editor, Cliff Buddle, previously in charge of courts coverage obviously knows better than anyone how the courts – undoubtedly the biggest single source of human interest stories – should be covered. He’s got only a single junior reporter looking after them. And that other source of high drama – politics – is looked after by relatively raw reporters.

Readers who feel they are getting a raw deal should put their minds at ease. A whole slew of replacements are in the works. They’ve advertised for senior reporters to cover crime, politics, medical and investigative beats. And, of course, the courts.

But thanks to strong editorial management from the very top tai-tais are making it big on Page 2 every day in Hong Kong’s only newspaper that has succeeded in giving you all that’s bright and beautiful.

With the South China Morning Post you’ll simply miss the real world – with or without more reporters.

2011-08-14T04:00:00.000-07:00

[中文]

HKJA Chairperson Mak Yin-ting speaks at the Annual Dinner

Guest-of-honour Charlies Li Xiaojia, Chief Executive of HongKong Exchanges and Clearing Limited receives a cartoon portraitof himself from the HKJA Chairperson Mak Yin-ting.

Mrs. Pollyanna Chu with her winning bid: the porcelain vase ‘Bamboo Song Bird’ donated by Mr. Charles Li. Other auction items at the function were Mr. Chow Yun-fat’s autographed photography work, Mr. Koo Mingkown’s

red wine, Richebourg – Domaine de la Romanee Conti 1998, and ‘A banquet with Mr. Jimmy Lai.’ All items fetched good prices.

Music for Our Young Foundation Orchestra conducted by Mr. Gordon Siu and Mr. Alex Sun rendered an extraordinary performance at the Annual Dinner.

Former anchor Mr. Ryan Lau and Mr. Tsang Chi-ho's stand-upcomedy act about the media and reporters filled the dining hallwith laughter.

The big smile on Mr. Charles Li's face tells us that he enjoyed the standupcomedy very much.

Musician Mr. Joey Ou and the Media Choir putting into song thedaily grind of front-line journalists.

Masters of ceremony, Ms. Rachel Miu and Mr. Yang Kut-si adding a light touch to the Annual Dinner.