How Papers Report on Murder in Hong Kong

These past seven days have seen two foreigners in the Hong Kong news but for the wrong reasons. Kelsey Mudd, a student at California State University, was convicted of murder and sentenced to about 4 years in jail. This student possesses citizenship in 3 countries: the United Kingdom, the United States and Australia. 

Perhaps more interesting than his citizenship status was how the student was portrayed by two competing English dailies in Hong Kong. The Standard, which charges no price for their paper and offers free online content, referred to the student as an Australian. But the South China Morning Post, which offers no free paper and no free online content, referred to the student as an American. 

I couldn't help but note this rather obvious difference in reporting. But as papers are fond of feigning neutrality, I began wondering about the meaning behind it. Are hidden motives involved? Are the papers biased against a particular country?

The other foreigner in the news is Nancy Kissel, who was previously convicted of murdering her husband but now has an opportunity to overturn the conviction. Again, there are differences in how the two papers approach the story, though this time nationality is not at issue.

The Standard hasn't bothered printing a single article about a possible retrial of Ms. Kissel, but the South China Morning Post, which has shown interest in covering the trial's new developments, printed a story on 2 November 2010 in which an anonymous staff writer seems to complain about a recent court order that effectively gags media coverage of the new hearings. In regards to the Kissel case, perhaps the familiar saying applies, 'another man's trash is another man's treasure'.

The New Social Classes

The reformer

Deng Xiaoping is credited with proclaiming to the people "to be rich is glorious". Apart from the market reforms of the 70s, other meaningful reforms never materialized. While many government officials and their families have benefited immensely from the nation's expanding economy, many have been left behind to fend for themselves in a system that is highly preferential to the wealthy.The most recent example I have heard of involved several company CEOs and managers in Shanghai receiving government subsidies for private housing.

Government attempts to cool the housing market have fizzled, graft continues unabated, GDP is viewed by cadres in all provinces as the holy grail which they are to chase after at all costs and the mantra 'more, more, more' can be heard from many officials who display insatiable appetites for greater material wealth.

Though Deng's reforms have succeeded in spreading around some of the wealth flowing into the country, its overall success has been limited due to graft at the national, provincial and municipal levels. As a result, this has contributed to a growing number of instances of social injustice. One of the most recent examples is the now infamous incident at Hebei University.

This has given rise to a dichotomy that I have termed The Resented and The Resentful. These two social classes are distinctly opposed to one another. A modern illustration of these two subclasses would be a princeling and the general public. A princeling is resented for their arrogance and belief that they are above the law while the public are resentful over the perceived sense of injustice from the son or daughter of an official.

While the western version would be similar to The Haves and The Have Nots, I don't believe this western classification applies because while both rich and non-rich Americans are busy chasing after the American dream, many Chinese strive for simple justice from their courts and elected officials.