Michael Chugani

Opinion | With pro-Beijing media setting Hong Kong’s red lines, Carrie Lam’s policy address offers little hope

The chief executive has said the blue cover of her policy address represents hope and that the national security law will not curb freedoms in Hong Kong. However, a manufacturer’s decision to suspend its business after pro-Beijing media accused it of violating the new law indicates it is having a chilling effect

Reading Time:3 minutes

Why you can trust SCMP

Chief Executive Carrie Lam arrives for a press conference at the Hong Kong government headquarters on November 25, after delivering her annual policy address at the Legislative Council. Photo: AFP

Michael Chugani

Published: 7:30am, 26 Nov 2020Updated: 8:38am, 26 Nov 2020

So now we know. Think twice before you exercise free speech as defined by law and international conventions. Media acting as Beijing’s mouthpiece have their own definition of free speech. Cross their red line and you’re done for.

Mask manufacturer Yellow Factory found out the hard way last week. Pro-Beijing media accused it of violating the national security law by inciting hatred, violence and prolonging resistance by young people.

What exactly did Yellow Factory do to trigger such an attack – I call it “white terror” – by the loyalist media? Its masks had the acronym FDNOL, which they said could mean “five demands, not one less”. I examined the national security law. Nowhere does it say FDNOL violates it. Neither does it specifically say the slogan “five demands, not one less” is a crime, although the authorities have warned it could violate the law.

Hongkongers must now view the word “could” in a new light. Whatever you do “could” violate the security law. Pro-Beijing media said Yellow Factory’s logo resembled a protester wearing a yellow helmet and goggles.

Also, its mask packaging had the slogan “Get well Hong Kong; fight the virus of our times”, which they said resembled the anti-government slogan “Liberate Hong Kong, revolution of our times”. The word “resemble” must also be viewed in a new light. You “could” be a security threat if you have a harmless logo that “resembles” a threat.

09:09

National Security Law: The impact on Hong Kong’s activists

I wonder if I “could” be violating the law if I said I take my yellow helmet off to Yellow Factory for its innovative ideas to promote its business. I don’t have a yellow helmet but rather a black safety helmet, which I used as a journalist during last year’s protests, that “resembles” it.