The words in the letter seem innocent enough. A simple notice sent to journalists' associations outlining amendments to Police General Orders concerning the media, stating the new definition of “recognised media personnel” will consist of reporters from local outlets registered with an official government scheme, and “internationally recognised and renowned” foreign media.

The truth is altogether more sinister. Make no mistake: what this amounts to is a full-throated attack not just on insurgent pro-democracy media outlets, but the journalistic profession in Hong Kong. It is yet another nail in the coffin for press freedom, and just the latest in a catalogue of recent moves by Beijing to silence all opposing voices in the city.

The aforementioned letter from the Police outlines new regulations that amount to a de facto Police-imposed press accreditation system. Upon the changes taking effect, only reporters from local outlets that are registered under the government’s restrictive GNMIS scheme, along with “internationally recognised and renowned” foreign media will be recognised at the scene of protests and other incidents as media representatives. Reporters from unrecognised outlets will thus be at the same risk of arrest and prosecution as protestors and passers-by.

The move comes in response to citizen journalists from insurgent upstart media outlets including Cupid News, Studio Incendo, and Flash Media uncovering horrific acts of police brutality, from filming on the platforms during the 831 Prince Edward Attack, to capturing the shooting of a 18-year-old protestor by Police at point-blank range on national day. In the wake of this, the authorities have simply decided to remove their ability to report on protests without their frontline reporters risking jail.

But the true rationale for the move is unspoken by the authorities. Such is the extent of groupthink among officialdom in Hong Kong and Beijing that many have come to believe the truly deranged idea that journalists from now-blacklisted outlets are “fake reporters” who collude with black-clad rioters (not to mention “hostile foreign forces” - a euphemism for the U.S. and U.K.) to attack and smear the Police Force.

It is important to state that there is absolutely no evidence to suggest this, and nor will there ever be. As ridiculous as this hypothesis is to any fair-minded observer, crazed delusions such as this have genuinely taken hold in government circles, to the extent that they now inform major public policy decisions. It is a truly extraordinary state of affairs.

That notwithstanding, the announcement is a very smart move tactically speaking for the authorities. It is about one thing only: control, control, and control - and it will succeed in its objective. Reporters from the aforementioned blacklisted outlets can now be picked off like scabs. In addition, the timing could not be more perfect. It is impossible for any meaningful wide-scale resistance to the move to be staged in the immediate term - least of all by the reporters affected by the move. It is yet another case of Beijing capitalising on the fallout from the global pandemic to steamroller over freedoms in Hong Kong that until just a few short months ago were taken for granted.

Despite fresh dangers faced by the above media outlets targeted by the move, their reporters will not even fare the worst. Instead, freelancers and student reporters will be the biggest casualties of the new regulations. Not only are they also targeted, but they also have virtually no prospect of being able to obtain accreditation that would protect them from arrest and possible prison sentences. Faced with such circumstances, most will simply conclude they can no longer report from the frontlines - which is, of course, precisely what the authorities want.

Returning to the unveiling of the announcement itself, the real question is who was it that authorised the move. Did the Hong Kong Police announce it unilaterally? Or was it authorised by a central government body or authority? It seems all but certain the Liaison Office will have signed off on it, but either way, one thing is certain: it will not have been a Hong Kong government initiative. This is not least due to Carrie Lam’s past opposition to a government press accreditation scheme, but mainly owing to the fact the Hong Kong government has now been totally sidelined with regard to any major decisions for some time, as shown by the direct imposition of the National Security Law by the National People’s Congress in Beijing.

Over the next few weeks and months, we will almost certainly see reporters from blacklisted outlets arrested and targeted using the full weight of the law for any infractions, real or imagined. But the sobering reality is that pro-democracy supporters can do little more than condemning the move. In the present reality, they have precious little leverage. Images of journalists in hi-vis press jackets being rounded up and arrested (and likely brutalised) will splash around the world, but for the foreseeable future, the democratic movement can only seek to absorb each successive blow inflicted by the authorities. How long it can stay standing remains to be seen.

(Jack Hazlewood is a student, producer and activist based in London, England. He previously worked for a localist political party in Hong Kong, and served as field producer for the conflict journalism outlet Popular Front’s documentary ‘Add Oil’, which followed frontline protestors in Hong Kong in the run-up to China’s national day in 2019.)

---------------------------------

Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE

To download the latest version,

iOS: bit.ly/AD_iOS

Android: bit.ly/AD_android

Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play