立即捐款

南早封殺李旺陽新聞:政協總編拒絕回應囑老外編輯自己識做

南早封殺李旺陽新聞:政協總編拒絕回應囑老外編輯自己識做
廣告

廣告

南華早報在六月六日李旺陽被自殺的消息爆出當天,把詳細的新聞故事刪減為二百字的簡訊,被視為封殺新聞。身份為吉林省政協的總編王向偉,被外籍同事 Alex Price 詢問為何作出如此決定時,竟然說:「我不需要向你解釋什麼。我做了這個我認為正確的決定。若你不喜歡,你自己該知道如何做。」Alex Price 認為這個回覆具威嚇性,用意是叫他「閉嘴或辭職」。

Alex Price最後把自已與王向偉的電郵對答轉給南華早報的同事,以下是電郵的原文及翻譯。六月七日的電郵:

Alex Price: Hi Xiangwei ... 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?
Alex Price: 嗨向偉… 很多人都在疑惑為何我們昨晚把李旺陽的新聞壓下去。這確實挺奇怪的,你可否解釋一下呢?

王向偉: I made that decision.
王向偉: 這是我做的決定。

Alex Price: Any chance you say why? It’s just that to the outside world it looks an awful lot like self-censorship ...
Alex Price: 你可否解釋為何有這個決定呢?外界認為這看來太像自我審查。

王向偉: 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.
王向偉:我不須要向你解釋什麼。我做了這個我認為正確的決定。若你不喜歡,你自己該知道如何做。

六月十一日電郵對答:

Alex Price: I am concerned by the intimidatory nature of your reply. A very strange editorial decision was made and everyone is wondering why. Many other news organisations splashed with the Li Wangyang story yet we reduced it to a brief. In such circumstances it is quite reasonable to ask the editor why the decision was made. Of course he may decline to say why; there could be any number of reasons, and he may well want to keep them to himself. But if the question was polite and reasonable than [then] I see no reason why the response should not be equally polite and reasonable.  As it stands, I am concerned.  I am now worried that anyone who wishes to raise issue with an editorial decision - no matter how much that decision appears to go against good journalism -  will be  told to shut up or leave. I am further concerned that my justifiable concern on this matter as a journalist may lead to the termination of my employment.
I look forward to a chat where you can put my mind at rest.

Alex Price: 我對你具有威嚇性的回覆很關注。一個很奇怪的編輯決定做了,所有人都感到奇怪。很多其他的新聞機構都放大李旺陽的故事,而我們則以簡訊的方法去處理。在這情況下,問編輯為何作出這決定是正常不過的。當然,他可以拒絕解釋。可以有很多不同的原因,而他可以不向外公開。但若提問合理和有禮,我看不到有何理由回答不能以同樣的方式作出。事到如今,我真的很在意。我擔心若任何人就編輯違反新聞專業的決定提出異議,會被告訴要閉嘴或離開。我亦擔心自己作為記者這合理的關注,會另我丟掉工作。
我期待可以跟你詳談以去除我的擔懮。

王向偉: I don't think my answer is anyway intimidatory and I don't know why you have formed your opinion.
王向偉:我不明白為何我的回答具威脅性,我亦不明白為何你會有如此的意見。

Alex Price: Xiang Wei; A good man died for his cause and we turned it from a story into a brief. The rest of Hong Kong splashed on it. Your staff are understandably concerned by this. News is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations. Please explain the decision to reduce the suspicious death of Li Wangyang to a brief. I need to be able to explain it to my friends who are asking why we did it. I'm sorry but  your reply of "it is my decision, if you don't like it you know what to do" is not enough  in such a situation. Frankly it seems to be saying "shut up or go". The SCMP has subsequently splashed on Li Wangyang, had a focus page devoted to the matter, plus editorials, two  columns by yourself and other stories. Yet on the day it counted we reduced the story to a nib.
Journalistic ethics are at stake. The credibility of the South China Morning Post is at stake. Your staff - and readers - deserve an answer.
I look forward to  hearing it.

Alex Price: 向偉:一個好人為了他的理念而死,我們把他的故事變成了簡訊。而所有香港的(媒體)都放大這故事。你的員工當然關注這事。新聞是要寫一些人不想讓公開的事情,其他的都是公關新聞。請解釋為何把李旺陽離奇死亡的故事變成簡訊。我需要向那些詢問我此事的朋友解釋。很對不起,你的回答:「這是我的決定,你不喜歡的話,你自已識做」不足以解釋。老實說,它更像在說:「閉嘴或離開」。南早最終到放大李旺陽的故事,做了一個專題頁,還有編輯評論,你亦寫了兩個專欄和其他故事。但在最重要的一天,我們把故事縮細。
這是涉及新聞倫理的問題,而關乎南華早報的聲譽。你的員工、讀者應該有一個答案。
我期待聽到這個答案。

王向偉,80年代畢業於北京外國語學院和社科院研究生院新聞系,目前是吉林政協。王曾在中國日報和英國的BBC中文網當記者,96年加入南早,時任中國商業記者。2000年升任為中國版主編,2007年再升任為南早的副總編。

在王向偉升任為主編前,南早高層經歷了重大的人事變動,前主編蔡翔祁 Reginald Chau 於2011年3月底離職,執行總編 David Lague 也在同年6月離職,文化版編輯 Janelle Carrigan 在去年7月離任。新聞界中盛傳,在委任王向偉為總編之前,南早的董事總經理郭惠光 (Kuok Hui-Kwong--郭鶴年之女)曾獲安排與港澳辦主任王光亞單對單會面

1993年,馬來西亞企業家郭鶴年的公司嘉里傳媒從梅鐸手中買下南華早報,自2000年開始,發生多宗資深員工被辭去或辭職的事件,惹起外界指責,指南華早報協助中國政府侵害香港新聞自由。

廣告