yearn for freedom in Hong Kong
Back in May 2020, when China announced that it would impose a national security law on Hong Kong, I worried that the Great Firewall of China would be extended to also go around Hong Kong in one fell swoop, and went and got a VPN (Virtual Private Network) -- to be able to "climb over the (virtual) wall" to access such as this social media platform -- for just in case. That didn't happen and, as it so happened, I didn't use the VPN even once in the two years that I had a subscription for it. But in recent days, I've felt a need to get a VPN again.
Hopefully, I won't have use for it within the next two years. But, again, I worry. Because of it being so that, as stated in a Wall Street Journal piece out today: "Bit by bit, American tech giants are shutting out users in Hong Kong, where moves by authorities to thwart online dissent are shifting the target from individuals to platforms such as Google’s YouTube".
Today, Monday (June 12th -- the fourth anniversary of a day that lives in infamy for many Hong Kongers thanks to the terrible behaviour of the police), saw a hearing scheduled of a court order sought by Hong Kong authorities to block the dissemination online of a popular pro-democracy anthem, Glory to Hong Kong. The order cites 32 videos on YouTube of the song, which has lyrics that contain a slogan -- "Liberate Hong Kong; revolution of our times" -- that the Hong Kong government says amounts to advocating secession.
As noted in the Wall Street Journal article: "It is the first major legal challenge to U.S. tech companies over politically sensitive content on their platforms in the city." And the chances are high that the court will approve it since the presiding judge is a national security judge: that is, one of those who has been handpicked by the government to hear national security law cases -- which, thus far, have gone 100% in favour of the government.
Unexpectedly though, Judge Wilson Chan did not (automatically) grant the injunction today. Rather, he adjourned the hearing until July 21st (one more "sensitive date" for Hong Kong due to what happened in 2019!) after he asked what lawyer Kevin Yam categorised as "some really basic questions and the Hong Kong Department of Justice was not ready to answer even the basics"! (As in: Is the injunction meant to be applicable worldwide? What's to happen after the injunction is issued? And what is the scope of the intended targets of the ban?)
One would hope that these questions would give the Department of Justice pause and get them realizing that they may be biting off more than they can chew. Sadly though, the chances are high that come July 21st, they'll be back in court seeking the injunction and that Judge Wilson Chan will grant it. In other words: it is highly likely that we've just got a temporary reprieve for what they want to effect.
And even without the injunction being granted, the fact of the matter is that, again quoting today's Wall Street Journal article by Newley Purnell: there already has been "a slow creep of tech giants treating Hong Kong more like a city in mainland China. Apple has joined with China’s Tencent to filter suspicious websites, with users complaining it temporarily blocked access to legitimate sites such as Twitter rival Mastodon. Disney has declined to offer on its streaming service two episodes of “The Simpsons” that it worried could run afoul of the national-security law, according to a person familiar with the matter."
By the way, for those who didn't realise: Mainland China "has had no access to foreign social-media services such as Twitter and Facebook since 2009" while Hong Kong has. Also, "Google in 2010 withdrew its search-engine business in mainland China
after refusing to agree to censor its search results in the country."
Still, make no mistake that, if -- or maybe, more accurately, when? -- granted, the court injunction to block Glory to Hong Kong would be a major game changer. In the view of George Chen, former head of public policy for Greater China at Facebook parent Meta Platforms, it "could amount to the “opening of floodgates” of legal action against U.S. tech giants".
As reported in the Wall Street Journal piece: "Hong Kong’s move to censor the pro-democracy song on YouTube signals that U.S. tech companies should anticipate further challenges over sensitive content, Chen said." Also, here's the general fear: ""This time it is about the song, next time it could be something else,” he said." And you can bet that the way things are going, there will be a next time and another next time and another next time, and sooner rather than later too. :(
No comments:
Post a Comment