9 Jan 2025獨媒#4408
《獨媒》向關愛隊索全年報告不果 民政：未有不達標情況、統整表現資料後向市民提供
“What have the Care Teams done?” has become a topic of public discussion recently. InMedia attempted to obtain from the Home Affairs Department the contents of the work reports of all 452 Care Teams across Hong Kong, but was not provided with them. InMedia subsequently contacted each Care Team by email and WhatsApp to enquire about details including activity expenditure. As of press time, six Care Teams had replied to the reporter, all saying that media enquiries were handled by the relevant District Office. The Home Affairs Department said on Wednesday (8th) that it was providing a unified response on behalf of all Care Teams, stating that all Care Teams were currently carrying out their work according to their KPIs and that there were no cases of failing to meet the standards. The department is currently consolidating all information on the performance of the Care Teams and will provide it to the public in an appropriate form once completed.
This year’s Policy Address announced that funding for the operation of the Care Teams would be regularised and that the subsidy would be increased by 50%. However, University Line reported last week that the Tsuen Wan District Office had refused to disclose the work reports of Care Teams in the district, and had filmed what appeared to be members of the public “pretending to be volunteers” at an activity, prompting public concern. The Under Secretary for Culture, Sports and Youth Clarence Wang Ching Leung subsequently criticised the report, saying it “may have painted with too broad a brush”, and added: “If there are any enquiries, everyone is welcome to approach the Home Affairs Department directly; we can provide the relevant information.”
「關愛隊做咗乜」成為近期社會熱話，《獨媒》嘗試向民政事務總署索取全港合共452隊的工作報告內容，惟未獲提供。《獨媒》及後以電郵及WhatsApp逐一聯絡各「關愛隊」，查詢活動開支詳情等。至截稿前，共有6隊「關愛隊」回覆記者，均表示傳媒查詢交由民政處負責。民政事務總署周三（8日）稱代所有「關愛隊」統一回覆，指目前各支「關愛隊」皆按KPI進行工作，沒有不達標的情況。署方現正全面統整所有有關「關愛隊」表現的資料，完成後會以適當形式向市民提供資料。
今年《施政報告》宣布，將恆常化撥款「關愛隊」運作及增加五成資助額。不過《大學線》上周報道，荃灣民政處拒絕公開區內關愛隊的工作報告，又拍攝到疑有市民在活動中「扮義工」，引起社會關注。民青局副局長梁宏正事後批評，報道「可能有些以偏概全」，又指「如有任何查詢，歡迎大家直接找民政總署，我們可以提供有關資料。」
8 Jan 2025光傳媒#4399
「警察勁揪」群組發起聯署投訴《大學線》報道 稱指導老師及該系教授「煽動學生反政府」
A recent report by Varsity, the student media outlet of The Chinese University of Hong Kong’s School of Journalism and Communication, about the Care Teams has sparked heated discussion. An official said the report “painted with a broad brush”. Less than a week after the controversy began, a pro-establishment group today (the 8th) launched a joint petition to complain to CUHK, alleging that the report’s adviser, Shum Wan-wah, and professor Li Lap-fung of the school had committed “professional misconduct”, “incited students against the government” and “poisoned the minds of the younger generation with false information”.
Someone launched the petition in the social media group “Police Are Awesome, the Brave Fear Nothing”. Letters were sent to former CUHK president Rocky S. Tuan, CUHK president Dennis Lo Yuk-ming and the dean of the School of Journalism and Communication, Anthony Ying Him Fung, complaining about CUHK part-time lecturer Shum Wan-wah, who supervised Varsity’s report “It’s None of Our ‘Care’ Business”, and School of Journalism and Communication professor Li Lap-fung. The petition alleged that the two had committed “professional misconduct”, called them “Hong Kong independence lecturers”, and accused them of unfairly blaming the government over the effectiveness of the Care Teams.
中文大學新聞與傳播學院學生媒體《大學線》近日一則有關「關愛隊」的報道引起熱議，有官員指報道「以偏概全」，事件發酵不足一周，今（8日）有建制群組發起聯署向中大投訴，指該報道的指導老師岑蘊華及該系教授李立峯「專業失德」，「煽動學生反政府」、「以虛假信息荼毒年輕一代嘅思想」。
有人在社交媒體群組「警察勁揪，勇者無懼」發起聯署，向中文大學校長段崇智（按：應為前校長）、中文大學校長盧煜明、新聞與傳播學院院長馮應謙（按：應為社會科學院院長）致函，投訴指導《大學線》「事不『關』己」報道的中大兼任講師岑蘊華，以及新傳學院教授李立峯「專業失德」，指二人為「港獨講師」，「老屈政府關受（按：愛）隊成效」。
6 Jan 2025獨媒#4393
《大學線》追訪關愛隊引熱議 中大新傳講師：傳媒係應該做呢啲工作
A report by CUHK student media The University Line following up on the Care Teams has become a hot topic in recent days. Some internet users praised the students’ work, while some officials criticised the report, saying it “may generalise from a partial view.” Shum Wan-wah, an adjunct lecturer at CUHK’s School of Journalism and Communication and a veteran media professional, said the students’ interviews were reasoned and evidence-based, and that she did not consider the subject of the report sensitive. Although some internet users commented, “Are these things reportable?”, she said, “The media should be doing this kind of work.”
中大新傳學生媒體《大學線》追訪關愛隊的報道是近日熱話，有網民讚賞學生做得好，但亦有官員批評報道「可能有些以偏概全」。中大新傳學院兼任講師、資深傳媒人岑蘊華認為，學生進行訪問時有理有據，自己亦不覺得報道題材敏感，雖然有網民留言「呢啲報唔報得㗎」，但「傳媒係應該做呢啲工作」。
5 Jan 2025獨媒#4388
《大學線》揭關愛隊邀市民穿背心充撐場面 梁宏正：報道有些以偏概全
A report by “University Line”, a student media outlet run by CUHK journalism and communication students, about the Care Teams has recently sparked discussion online. The report revealed that some Care Team members distributed vests for participants to wear before taking group photos at activities to “pad out the scene”. It also said that the outlet had repeatedly applied to the District Offices for Care Team work reports but was refused. Clarence Wang Ching Leung, Under Secretary for Home and Youth Affairs, said that Care Team services required the help of volunteers, and that the report “may have painted with too broad a brush, or may not have been comprehensive”. Clarence Wang Ching Leung also said: “If anyone has any enquiries, they are welcome to contact the Home Affairs Department directly; we can provide the relevant information.”
中大新傳學生媒體《大學線》一則關於關愛隊的報道近日在網上引起迴響。報道中，記者揭發有關愛隊成員在拍攝活動大合照前，派發背心予參加者穿上「充撐場面」，又多番向民政處申請索取關愛隊工作報告，但被拒絕。民青局副局長梁宏正回應指，關愛隊的服務是需要找義工幫忙，報道「可能有些以偏概全，或者未必是全面」，又指「如有任何查詢，歡迎大家直接找民政總署，我們可以提供有關資料」。
10 Dec 2024yahoo#4345
香港民研最新民調 65%受訪者認為新聞傳媒有自我審查 比率創1997年以來新高｜Yahoo
The Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute released its latest poll results today (10 November). In the survey conducted in early November, 65% of respondents said they believed Hong Kong news media practised self-censorship, the highest rate since records began in 1997. Another 22% believed there was no self-censorship, producing a net figure of positive 43 percentage points, also a historical high.
香港民意研究所今（10 日）發布最新民調結果，於 11 月上旬進行的調查中，有 65% 受訪者認為香港新聞傳媒有自我審查，比率創 1997 年有紀錄以來新高；另有 22% 認為沒有自我審查，淨值為正 43 個百分點，淨值同樣是歷史新高。
4 Dec 2024Yahoo#4324
國泰機上動畫涉影射天安門事件 被乘客投訴違《國安法》 國泰：即時下架並責成供應商徹查
A passenger complained about Cathay Pacific’s in-flight entertainment, saying an animated programme referred to the “Tiananmen incident” and included footage of a person using their body to block tanks, which the passenger questioned as potentially violating the National Security Law. In response to enquiries from Yahoo News, Cathay Pacific apologised to affected passengers and stressed that the video’s content did not represent the airline’s position. It said the programme had been removed immediately. Cathay added that in-flight entertainment content is handled by a third-party service provider, to which it had immediately conveyed the seriousness of the incident and instructed to investigate its cause thoroughly.
國泰航空機上娛樂節目遭乘客投訴，稱有動畫節目內容提及「天安門事件」，亦有「肉身擋坦克」的畫面，被乘客質疑有違反《國安法》之嫌。國泰航空回覆《Yahoo 新聞》查詢時，向受影響乘客致歉，並強調有關影片內容不代表國泰航空的立場，已即時將該節目下架。國泰並指，機上娛樂影片內容由第三方服務供應商負責，國泰已即時向供應商反映事件的嚴重性，並責成徹查成因。
20 Nov 2024ReNews#4254
商台節目《一切從音樂開始》 原訂主題為「在囚人士的點唱」 其後刪去字眼
Commercial Radio programme “It All Begins with Music” announced on social media this morning that tonight’s themes would be “song requests from prisoners” and one favourite song from each person. The post attracted widespread attention as 47 people in a case were sentenced yesterday. By 7pm, the post had been amended: the theme “song requests from prisoners” was removed, and the accompanying image was also changed, leaving only “one favourite song from each person”.
商台節目《一切從音樂開始》，今早在社交媒體公布，今晚節目的主題是「在囚人士的點唱」和一人一首喜歡的歌曲，由於昨日是 47 人案判刑，帖文獲廣泛關注。
但到晚上七時，該帖文被修改，「在囚人士的點唱」的主題被刪走，相關圖片亦更改，只餘下「一人一首喜歡的歌曲」。
12 Nov 2024集誌社#4225
「敏感」燈柱｜16 支89、64組合路燈 最少 11 支「已熄滅」
The Collective reported last Thursday (the 7th) that the “8964 streetlights” near Tin Tin Road in Yuen Long had disappeared, although the geospatial information map had not been updated. According to the “Streetlight Location Data” on the government’s open data platform that day, Hong Kong still had eight other streetlights whose numbers contained “8964” and seven whose numbers contained “6489”, spread across Hong Kong Island, Kowloon, the New Territories and the outlying islands. One day later (the 8th), “8964” and “6489” streetlights could no longer be found on either the data platform or the “Geospatial Information Map”; all streetlights at the original locations had been renumbered.
To determine whether all the “8964” and “6489” streetlights had disappeared, reporters recently visited various districts and inspected the remaining streetlights, excluding the “6489” streetlight at Yin Hing Monastery on Lantau Island. They found that, of the 15 streetlights, at least four had still not been renumbered as of November 10, while the other 11 “64” streetlights had all disappeared and been “renovated” into other numbers.
Why did the government delete the old numbers online in advance of “renovating” the streetlights? Could this pose a danger to members of the public using streetlight locations when calling an ambulance or seeking help? What was the reason for the sudden disappearance of the large number of “64” streetlights? The Highways Department did not directly answer the queries in its reply tonight (the 12th), reiterating that renumbering may be considered when streetlight poles are renovated or beautified.
《集誌社》上周四（7日）報道元朗馬田路附近的 「8964 路燈」消失，但地理資訊地圖未更新；根據當日政府開放數據平台上的「街燈位置資料」，全港還有另外 8 支編號有「8964」的路燈、以及 7 支編號有「6489」的路燈，遍布港、九、新界、離島各區。一日後（8日），在數據平台和「地理資訊地圖」上，突然完全搜查不到「8964」和「6489」路燈，原有位置的路燈全為「重新編號」。
為確認「8964」和「6489」路燈是否已全部消失，除大嶼山延慶寺「6489」路燈外，記者日前走訪各區、觀察其餘路燈現況，發現 15 支路燈中，最少有 4 支在 11 月10 日仍未被重新編號，其餘 11 支 「64」路燈則全部消失、被「翻新」為其他編號。
為何政府會在「翻新」路燈前「偷步」在網上刪除舊編號？此舉會否為使用路燈定位的公眾，在召喚救護者或求助時帶來危險？大批「64」路燈突被消失原因為何？路政署今晚（12日）回覆沒直接回應查詢，重申翻新／美化燈柱時會考慮重新編號。
12 Nov 2024集誌社#4226
炒記協主席｜鄭嘉如與《華爾街日報》溝通無效 向勞工處提申索
Cheng Ka-yu, who became chair of the Hong Kong Journalists Association in the middle of this year and was subsequently dismissed by The Wall Street Journal, filed a claim with the Labour Department today (November 12) over the matter. She said she had tried to invite The Wall Street Journal to mediation, but it refused and maintained that the dismissal was solely due to a “need for redundancies”, rejecting her request for reinstatement. Cheng called on the Labour Department to address the issue and investigate the alleged violation of the Employment Ordinance by The Wall Street Journal, in order to protect workers’ rights in Hong Kong.
今年年中上任記協主席後，即被《華爾街日報》解僱的鄭嘉如，今日（11月 12日）就事件到勞工處提出申索。她稱曾嘗試邀請《華爾街日報》調解，但對方拒絕，並堅持解僱只是出於「裁員需要」，拒絕她復職的要求。鄭要求勞工處正視問題，就華爾街日報涉違反《僱傭條例》作調查，以保障香港勞工權益。
7 Nov 2024集誌社#4214
元朗「8964」路燈不見了 路政署：翻新後重新編號
A street lamp on Yu Wing Path, Yuen Long, originally bore the number FA8964, attracting attention online. The Collective photographed and recorded it on June 4, 2023, and again on the eve of June 4, 2024. The lamp’s number was recently changed to GD8332. Among more than 10 nearby street lamps, four were repainted and renumbered. The Highways Department replied tonight (the 7th) that when installing new street lamps, adjusting their positions, or refurbishing or beautifying lamp posts, it may consider renumbering them. It said the lamp post in question had been “renumbered after refurbishment in recent days” in accordance with this practice.
元朗裕榮徑原有一支路燈印有 FA8964 編號，引起網民關注，《集誌社》在 2023 年 6月 4日、2024 年六四前夕都曾拍攝記錄。路燈編號近日突然被為 GD8332，鄰近的十多支路燈中，有四枝路燈被重新上油和更改編號。路政署今晚（7日）回覆指安裝新路燈、調整路燈位置或翻新／美化燈柱時，會考慮為燈柱重新編號，有關燈柱是按做法「在日前翻新後重新編號」。
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
