Repeated blunders leave Apple Daily's reputation in tatters

Updated: 2013-01-16 05:59

By Chan Wai-keung(HK Edition)

  Print Mail Large Medium  Small 分享按鈕 0

Mark Twain once said: "If you don't read the newspaper, you're uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you're misinformed." Echoing Twain's adage, the African American human rights activist Malcolm X also opined: "The media is the most powerful entity on earth. They have power to make innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent..."

Acutely aware of their dangerous power, the Western media usually assure the public of their impartiality by upholding the principles of ethics and meticulousness. In case of erroneous or falsified news reports, the media concerned is expected not only to make a public apology, but also to hold the journalists and editors involved responsible.

Some telling examples were the Killian document controversy in the US shortly before the 2004 election involving CBS News and the recent scandal surrounding BBC TV station. Both CBS and BBC apologized for the erroneous reports, launched probes and released investigation reports. Those executives, editors and reporters who were found responsible for the errors were sacked summarily.

Likewise, the leading Hong Kong newspaper, Apple Daily, recently published one editorial and one news report based on fictitious content. Sadly, unlike the Western media, Apple Daily seems to have taken these journalistic blunders lightly.

As I pointed out in my commentary in this newspaper on Oct 16, 2012, the well-known writer, Li Yi, appropriated the fabricated historical narrative of the former governor Murray MacLehose in an Apple Daily editorial, to sustain his attack on former deputy director of the Liaison Office, Li Gang. His use of unauthentic material purported to be historical evidence immediately draw criticism from some current affairs commentators, calling the credibility of Apple Daily into question. Nonetheless, up to now, neither Li Yi nor Apple Daily has offered an apology to readers.

Worse still, last Sunday, Apple Daily ran on its front-page an exclusive on a closed-door seminar given by the Executive Council member, Franklin Lam, accusing him of making an awful howler in his presentation. In an analysis of the relationship between new immigrants and housing, Lam had allegedly contended: "I utterly discriminate against new immigrants."

However, on the same day, Lam promptly pointed out that Apple Daily had distorted his words. An audio recording released by Lam provided irrefutable evidence that he had made no discriminatory remarks concerning new immigrants. On the contrary, the tape revealed he had said: " I utterly do not discriminate against new immigrants. On arrival in Hong Kong, they are legally Hong Kong citizens. They are also first-class citizens."

On the next day, the Apple Daily on its front page admitted that what it has misrepresented as a scoop the previous day was an inaccurate report, thereby apologizing to Lam. Its editor-in-chief further explained that the inaccuracy had been probably due to lapses of attention by the reporter.

But, can a public apology and a superficial explanation exonerate Apple Daily from its responsibility for publishing a fallacious report? I do not think so. A lot of questions about this journalistic fiasco remain unanswered to members of the public. For example, according to the audio tape, Lam clearly articulated the sentence "I am utterly not discriminating...". Why did the reporters concerned continue to misinterpret Lam's wording? Why did they fail to test the accuracy of their interpretation of Lam's words against other sources, such as other members of the audience? Did the Apple Daily reporters concerned make basic journalistic errors like those made in the erroneous BBC report? Given enough time allotted to story preparation, did they outright seek out the protagonist of this news story, Lam, to give him the opportunity to respond to any allegation that he had made any discriminatory remarks, before running this disgraceful exclusive?

It is, however, not sensible to blame entirely the reporters who covered Lam's seminar for the blunder. Instead, the editors concerned should be held responsible as well. Was there any independent fact-checking by another employee of Apple Daily under the instructions of senior editors? More importantly, did both the reporters and editors do any soul searching and question their own motives behind this faux exclusive? Did their political stance - anti-establishment and anti-CY Leung - cloud and even overwhelm their rational judgment in preparation of this news report?

If the protagonist of this news story had not been Franklin Lam, a political ally of CY Leung, but another big shot unrelated to the Leung administration, would Apple Daily's staff have exercised greater care to avoid the reckless error?

Apple Daily's professional reputation is in tatters. To do justice to the readers as well as Lam, Apple daily should follow suit with its Western counterparts' by implementing a thorough probe into the cause of this fiasco and, more crucially, by publishing the report of its investigation and, in due course, penalizing the staff responsible. If not, more and more innocents will be held as guilty in Apple Daily's politically-motivated reports.

The author is a lecturer of Hong Kong Polytechnic University and a former Scouloudi fellow at London University.

(HK Edition 01/16/2013 page4)

主站蜘蛛池模板: 收集最新中文国产中文字幕| 亚洲字幕在线观看| 亚洲永久网址在线观看| 五月天综合婷婷| 中文字幕第二十页| 99re热在线观看| 黑人巨鞭大战中国妇女| 红楼遗梦成人h文完整版| 毛片试看120秒| 日韩一级黄色片| 女人被男人狂躁免费视频| 国产精品99久久精品爆乳| 又粗又黄又猛又爽大片免费| 亚洲欧美一级视频| 久久av无码专区亚洲av桃花岛| a级成人毛片久久| 黄网站在线免费| 理论秋霞在线看免费| 日韩精品欧美激情国产一区| 奶交性视频欧美| 国产思思99re99在线观看| 你懂的视频在线播放| 久久婷五月综合| 99国产超薄丝袜足j在线观看| 黄色aaa大片| 欧美精品免费观看二区| 成年美女黄网站色大片图片| 国产精品亚洲片在线观看不卡| 喝乖女的奶水h1v| 亚洲人成网站999久久久综合| 一区两区三不卡| 青娱乐国产在线视频| 欧美精品v国产精品v日韩精品| 成年丰满熟妇午夜免费视频| 国产粉嫩嫩00在线正在播放| 俺来也俺去啦久久综合网| 久久久综合视频| 青青操在线视频| 熟女老女人的网站| 成人欧美一区二区三区黑人| 国产欧美日韩在线播放|