The decay of press freedom in Hong Kong continues unabated. The latest episode in this sorry tale which began in 1997, but picked up some serious speed after the anointment of lying Leung Chun-ying in 2012, is the dropping of four newspaper columnists (by the way, the fourth chap is Frank Ching).
Don’t go looking for a smoking gun though. This was most likely done surreptitiously, perhaps a ‘friendly’ phone call from an advertiser, a Chinese company perhaps, that sort of thing.
The really sad part is that on the Chinese language side, things have of course progressed way beyond surreptitious acts.
So all the media seems to be confounded by the ‘shy conservative’ phenomenon. ‘Shy conservatives’ are purported to be the reason why pollsters got their predictions so badly wrong in the recent UK parliamentary elections. Specifically, it is argued that because conservative voters have been shamed by the media et al, they were too shy to tell pollsters their true voting intentions.
In fact, it wasn’t only the pre-election polls. Even the exit polls had the Tories at 316, 15 short of their actual result, further supporting the notion that conservative voters in the UK are reluctant to tell pollsters and exit pollsters their true opinions. It seems as if there is some truth to this notion of the shy conservative.
But this is nothing new, of course. This year’s election is very similar to the one held in 1992. Back then too, the predicted result was a hung parliament and back then too, no one seemed to have predicted that the Tories would win a fairly solid majority of 336 (5 more than this year). The reasons were no different then, than they are now. Conservative voters in the UK seem to tell pollsters one thing, and then do another thing in the privacy of the polling both.
And just as the voters in 1992 spared the country from Neil Kinnock, this time they spared it from Red Ed. Good on them.