SCMP前員工聯署公開信 促保獨立

《南早》前員工聯署 促保獨立
關注「李旺陽簡訊」 指聲譽質素下降

2012年7月15日

【明報專訊】湖南維權人士李旺陽離奇死亡事件引起廣泛關注，《南華早報》因以極小篇幅處理，惹來自我審查質疑，繼早前有40編採人員聯署要求總編輯王向偉解釋，再有24名前《南早》編採人員向集團執行董事郭惠光發表公開信，關注該報近年聲譽與質素下降，促請保持報紙獨立客觀立場，保衛「百年老店」聲譽。《南早》總編輯王向偉強調事件已告一段落，惟該報再有兩名外籍資深人員不獲續約。

前副總編：問題在《南早》擁有人

王向偉昨回應時表示，理解外界關心《南早》發展，但他重申編輯部沒有自我審查。曾任《南早》副總編輯的中國問題專家林和立直言，《南早》立場保守由來已久，問題關鍵不在總編輯人選，而是擁有南早的郭鶴年家族。他說，郭氏家族在內地有不少生意，處理內地新聞避重就輕，如維權異見、官員貪腐、政治權鬥的處理都見謹慎，話題退熱才稍加報道，「王向偉加劇矛盾與批評，卻未嘗試制止（自我審查）」。

林和立與早前不獲續約的駐內地記者慕亦仁（Paul Mooney）等24名前編採人員，向《南早》執行董事郭惠光聯署公開信，關注前東家處理李旺陽報道手法。聯署人士在《南早》工作不少時間，現已各散東西，在澳洲、日本、英國等地工作。信件開首直言《南早》「近年，特別近日」水準及聲名下滑，將李旺陽新聞縮成簡訊，尤令忠實讀者氣憤。

「上頭命不用做茉莉花革命」

對於王向偉早前曾解釋中央電視台新聞聯播未見李旺陽消息，故將新聞「做細」，聯署信指中央台以新聞來源而言如同「無知來源」（source of ignorance），不應作為衡量新聞標準。至於該報資深編輯Alex Price向王表示質疑報館自我審查，換來一句「你不喜歡，該知怎做」，更令他們傷感，「《南早》歷來是香港市民的重要資源，一旦衰落將是重大損失」。他們最後要求郭惠光保衛該報獨立與真誠傳統。

曾任職南早8年的聯署行動發言人簡威廉（Will Clem）稱，近年駐守內地期間，一旦報道敏感議題，便感到報章自我審查，「舊年茉莉花革命如火如荼，上頭卻說不用做，fizzled（失敗）」，他認為《南早》把香港與中國事情帶到海外，希望報章繼續客觀反映中國的變化，「好嘅要寫，唔好嘅要寫」。

再兩編輯不獲續約南早：非因意見不合

另一聯署人Paul Mooney早前不獲續約後，消息指兩名資深編輯Ewen Campbell及Peter Welton亦不獲續約，現職編採人員或再發起聯署行動，力撐同事。王向偉昨於電話回應，表示沒有特別原因不為二人續約，「沒有任何意見不合」，強調《南早》感謝他們多年貢獻。《南早》編輯部回應稱，公司規定員工年屆60歲退休，往後會每年更新其聘約，而續約與否要考慮員工的技能、表現及公司的管理要求。回應補充，多媒體日趨當道，公司需投資正確的人力物力，帶領發展。

林和立表示該兩名舊同事非常資深，「我89年入《南早》，Campbell早過我，Welton都係90年代」，認為二人富於經驗，是《南早》的資產，「好可惜，以往比較少（不續約）」。

公開信部分內容，摘自asiasentinel.com

“The South China Morning Post has never been a radical publication, but it has served the people of Hong Kong for 100 years by providing them with accurate and timely information,” the letter said. “It is now widely believed that the paper's main priority is no longer to continue this fine tradition, but to please the authorities in Beijing.”

The current controversy at the paper broke open in early June when Alex Price, a senior sub-editor at the paper, questioned a decision by Wang to reduce a major breaking story on the suspicious death of Tiananmen dissident Li Wangyang in a Hunan hospital to a brief.

Price sent Wang an email saying “A lot of people are wondering why we nibbed the Li Wangyang story last night. It does seem rather odd. Any chance you can shed some light on the matter?” That generated a series of emails during which Wang said “I don’t have to explain to you anything. I made the decision and I stand by it. If you don’t like it, you know what to do.”

After some additional exchanges, Price sent the emails to some colleagues who leaked them to outsiders. Asia Sentinel broke the story on June 19 and subsequently Hong Kong’s Chinese press had a field day with it. Remarkably, Price managed to keep his job.

Wang later sought to justify his decision to the staff by saying the story over Li’s death had received little or no coverage on CCTV, the Chinese government’s stated-owned television news service.

“The latest dispute over the curtailed coverage of the Li Wangyang story has angered a great many of the Post's traditional readers and supporters,” the former Post journalists said in the letter. “It suggests that the charges of the paper's critics are justified. We understand that news judgments have to be made in haste and occasional errors are to be expected. “Some of the explanations for the Li Wangwang decision suggest, though, that a change in policy has taken place. The idea that the story needed to be downplayed because it had received little or no coverage on CCTV is unworthy of the Post's traditions as an independent and enterprising newspaper. CCTV no doubt has a role as a source of information. If used as an indicator of news values it is a source of ignorance.

“We are distressed to hear that a senior editor who asked about the decision was told that "if you don't like it you know what to do". We would like to believe that this was a careless piece of phraseology penned in a moment of excitement but it sounds suspiciously as if staff are no longer expected to understand or support the newspaper's policy, merely to follow instructions.

“We are concerned by all this not only because we were once happy and proud to work for the Post, and do not like to see its reputation deteriorate, but also because the newspaper has historically been an important civic resource for the people of Hong Kong. It will be a serious public loss if the newspaper continues to go downhill.

“The constant changes in the editorship of the Post suggest that either the owners do not know what they want, or they want something that no credible senior journalists will provide. We urge you to protect and cherish the South China Morning Post's traditions of independence, truthfulness and service to its readers.

“We urge you to ensure that stories are evaluated on the basis of their interest to Hong Kong readers. We urge you to ensure that Post journalists are able to work according to an explicit and understood editorial policy. We urge you to encourage the newspaper's management to give civil answers to civil questions. We hope that our connections with the Post will continue to be a source of pride, in its continuing commitment to independence, accuracy and public service.” Inside the paper, there seems to be little indication that Wang and his management team are paying any attention to the criticism. One source told Asia Sentinel the editor continues to tighten his grip, extending his influence to the editorial page and arguing that more pro-China and pro-Hong Kong government editorials appear.

The signatories to the letter follow:

*       Kitty Au
*       Jonathan Braude
*       Jasper Becker
*       Barclay Crawford
*       Ellen Chan
*       Will Clem
*       Steve Cray
*       David Evans
*       Katherine Forestier
*       Danny Gittings
*       Tim Hamlett
*       Fong Tak-ho
*       Lydia Ho
*       Carol Lai
*       Chloe Lai
*       Willy Lam
*       Angel Lau
*       Shirley Lau
*       Eddie Lee
*       Lieu Siew Ying
*       Sheila McNamara
*       James Moore
*       Paul Mooney
*       Dustin Shum