Kapok: Sealed Lips

What’s happening with TDM (Teledifusão de Macau, the public TV)? Why, all of a sudden these big changes in debate and current affairs programs in Chinese? Macau Forum (澳門論壇) was suspended at the end of December and now the “Wind and Fire Station” (風火台) is promised to a thorough reshuffling after Chinese New Year. The interruption of Macau Forum has created a stir among the pro-democrats in Macao, ultimately triggering a bold response from the New Macau Association that has decided to host an alternative New Macau Forum on the Internet. Remember, we are in an election year: any encroachment on freedom of expression is going to be more closely monitored than usual and of course will have a deeper impact on both the degree of fairness of the coming legislative campaign and its ultimate outcome.
Macau Forum started back in July 2011, and was aired every Sunday morning from an open stage in Jardim Areia Preta, opened to the public and gathering between three to four guests discussing for 50mn wide-ranging current affairs topics pertaining to Macao (general livelihood issues as well as various governmental consultations) and inviting questions from the public. This particular program was modeled on the very successful 45mn City Forum broadcasted by RTHK, Hong Kong’s public TV, in Victoria Park on Sundays since April 1980. Many acknowledge that City Forum has become one of the highlights of mediatized political debate in our twin SAR, and even more so since the hotly contested political reform package in 2010.
Let’s be honest: Macau Forum never managed to find a wide following. According to audience surveys, a maximum of 40% of the population would watch the forum occasionally. When one looks at the number of page views from the archives, only the first broadcast of the program has been watched more than 1,500 times, and only one in recent months (early September) managed to attract close to 1,000 views on the Internet, most of the installments stalling at around 200 views. Nevertheless, Macau Forum very often got quoted in the printed press the next day, and the impact was thus wider than live watching and Internet second life. Was Macau Forum ever really given a chance to strive and find an audience? It was originally presented by veteran TDM journalist Yip Kuok Va, the very same person who is presenting the Thursday evening 40mn debate program “Wind and Fire Station” today under threat: for some reason, he was discreetly replaced by two young journalists — less argumentative to put it nicely — in April 2012, and then invited guests started to be very often less controversial. Now, what was originally characterized by TDM CEO as the “most important program” of the public station has simply been dismissed after just a year and a half of existence on the pretext of “lack of human resources”: is it credible?
Nobody can say that there is absolutely no freedom of expression in Chinese electronic mass media in Macao as far as political debate is concerned: after all, the most challenging broadcast is aired daily as a call-in morning program (澳門講場) on the public radio and is so popular that every single administration has a staff summarizing every morning what is often seen as the pulse of Macao society. On Lotus TV, Macao Tales (澳門開講), a daily 1-hour call-in program, has also been gathering momentum since it started in October 2011.
So why stop Macau Forum now? Are traditional associations such as the Neighborhood Association and the General Association of Workers that afraid of getting into a democratic debate that would necessarily force them to take some distance from the government? If suspicions that some pressure has been imposed from above to shut down the program have for now remained groundless, what is really despicable is the resounding silence of the five journalists associations of Macao: not a single one of them has voiced out any concern! But how could it be otherwise when one of the most two important of these is headed by a member of the National People’s Congress and the other one by the Head of Chinese News at TDM?

This is the longer and html rich version of my column published in Macau Daily Times on January 25 2013.

Kapok: Smoke and Mirrors

Several local stakeholders, whether from the government, the civil society or of course THE industry - meaning the casino industry as they often refer to themselves - have been blowing smoke for a while regarding the measures that pave the way for a tobacco free (and therefore healthier) environment in Macao. In fact, this has been the case ever since the idea of such a new piece of legislation was aired in 2010 and the law was ultimately passed in May 2011, which, incidentally, was the same month China began enforcing a ban on smoking in public spaces, but five years after Hong Kong had passed a similar bill: holy smoke, that comes as a surprise!
The mere fact that it took a year and a half for that law to be enshrined in the official gazette serves as an indication that the pressing urge for such a tobacco control policy was far from unanimous. I routinely discuss that law with my students as an illustration for a class on “conflicts of interest,” smoking out the deceitful vested interests at play and the inner workings of a paternalist and yet clientelist political environment: after all, there is no smoke without a fire!
The composition of the Second Permanent Commission that examined the law before it was discussed and (finally) passed is rather telling. The commission is presided over by Mr Chan Chak Mo, an indirectly-elected legislator who is also the chairman of the United Association of Food and Beverage Merchants of Macao (the organizer of the shameful Macao Food Festival…) and General Manager of Future Bright, a company that operates no less than 24 restaurants and ten food courts! No wonder the law was delayed and bars, dance halls, saunas and massage parlors got a three-year reprieve and casinos a one-year exemption before having to comply for only half of their surface area! The brother of the Chief Executive, Mr Chui Sai Cheong, is also an indirectly-elected member of that commission, and so is Mr Chan Meng Kam, a directly elected casino operator, along with Mr Lee Chong Cheng, a directly elected legislator who is also the deputy director of the General Association of Workers in Macao - an association that is very vocal in defending casino workers’ rights today!
Might that be due to upcoming elections? Would that mean that things finally get discussed when competition is introduced and a pre-electoral campaign looms?
Let me parade my smoking barrels then! Sometimes things backfire, just as they did for Mrs Angela Leong, an elected legislator who can usually rely on her employees to get elected, and was so adamant about asking for a complete smoke free environment in casinos (despite the law she voted for…) that she was cornered by her own contradictions when she was confronted by challenging casino workers who suggested she should lead by example and immediately implement in the casinos she operates an absolutely smoke-free policy, instead of the “minimum 50%” required by the law! The rule of woman if not the rule of law…
The government certainly issued its regulations regarding the “less than 50%” prescription very late (October 29, 2012!), indeed, probably too late and without adequate consultation and discussion with casino operators prior to the announcement of the required instructions regarding air quality and signalization. But let’s not kid ourselves either: casino operators, all of them, are displaying an extraordinary amount of insincerity in applying the law, despite all their claims to the contrary. In all casinos I have visited since January 1, all non-smoking areas are concentrated in the most deserted parts of the premises. Isn’t “good faith,” or its contrary, legally binding somehow? Oops, another one that goes up in smoke!

Published in Macau Daily Times on January 11th 2013