<tt id="6hsgl"><pre id="6hsgl"><pre id="6hsgl"></pre></pre></tt>
          <nav id="6hsgl"><th id="6hsgl"></th></nav>
          国产免费网站看v片元遮挡,一亚洲一区二区中文字幕,波多野结衣一区二区免费视频,天天色综网,久久综合给合久久狠狠狠,男人的天堂av一二三区,午夜福利看片在线观看,亚洲中文字幕在线无码一区二区
          Global EditionASIA 中文雙語Fran?ais
          Opinion
          Home / Opinion / From the Press

          HKSAR needs to take decisive steps to combat 'fake news'

          By Paul Yeung | China Daily Asia | Updated: 2019-12-12 09:31
          Share
          Share - WeChat
          [Photo/IC]

          With the political turmoil arising from the anti-extradition bill movement having dragged on for an astounding six-month period, few would disagree that rebuilding trust across community sectors is a critical issue in Hong Kong. Now that the extradition law amendment bill has been withdrawn and the District Council elections are over, it is high time that people of Hong Kong stand together to restore the city.

          However, the intensifying polarization in society, facilitated by the spread of rumors and fake news relating to political issues, is a major stumbling block to rebuilding trust. These ill-intentioned rumors serve no other purpose than to fuel fears and anger, and they widen the rifts among people. For instance, the opposition camp claimed that six people were killed at the Prince Edward MTR station on Aug 31 when police carried out a removal operation. This rumor apparently has served them well in stoking much public anger since September, and has led to escalating violence and casualties ever since. However, according to an investigative report released by FactWire at the end of November, the six were either sent to a hospital or police station, and were very much alive and kicking. Unfortunately, the report came too late, and the damage to the trust of police had already been done. Rumors like this are the greatest obstacle to rebuilding trust. This problem needs to be tackled as soon as possible.

          Rumors are indeed nothing new. But it is a cause of concern in politics, especially when the rapid development of the internet and social media helps fake news go viral quickly. This phenomenon can be aptly explained by the term “post-truth politics”, which refers to a political culture in which debate is largely framed by appeals to emotions instead of evidence and facts. The term was even chosen as Oxford Dictionaries’ Word of the Year in 2016 due to its significant role in the Brexit referendum and the US presidential election. It is discovered that one can turbocharge the harmful social polarization by disseminating bad or fake information through technology. Obviously, post-truth politics have been playing their part in the current political saga in Hong Kong, manifested in the escalating violence and hatred against the government and the police. Learning from international experience, we can cope with this problem in mainly two ways.

          The first one is to take a hard line on fake information and rumors. Singapore has set a good example in this regard. In 2018, the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods, which is a select committee of the Parliament of Singapore, was formed to examine and report on the problem of deliberate online falsehoods and to recommend strategies to deal with them. In 2019, the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Bill was passed and came into effect in October. The Infocomm Media Development Authority is tasked to implement this law. Under this new law, all cabinet ministers can issue a “Part 4 Direction” to social media companies and internet service providers if an individual does not correct or take down posts with false statements of fact. Last month, the Singapore government invoked one of the most controversial measures of this new law to order Facebook to rectify a post by an Australia-based blogger who refused to comply with the law. The Singaporean case is nevertheless difficult for Hong Kong to adopt, for it would require an assertive government that can delicately prioritize freedom of speech while being determined to resolve post-truth politics.

          The second way is to take a soft line, which entails setting up fact-checking organizations. According to the Reporters’ Lab at Duke University, a “qualified” fact-checking organization should examine all parties and sides; examine discrete claims and reaches conclusions; track political promises; be transparent about sources and methods; disclose funding/affiliations; and set the primary mission as news and information.

          The Taiwan FactCheck Center, for example, is a nonprofit organization established to examine the authenticity of information relevant to public affairs. The fact-checking operation is based on the principles of openness, transparency, rigor, and accountability. All fact-checks are built on verified materials, with reports explaining its review process, and a complete list of the source materials and information, and data used for verification is also attached at the end of the report. While some may question the political background of the center, it would, on political issues, select the subjects of fact-checking across different ideological positions and strive to give each position equal attention.

          Xunzi, a Chinese Confucian philosopher, told us, “Rumors are stopped by the wise.” Although its effectiveness is still unknown at this moment, the fact-checking organizations, being a soft-line approach that is more palatable to the general public in Hong Kong, may make us wiser by dispelling rumors and fake news that spread like influenza, which requires good personal hygiene to prevent the spreading of germs. Therefore, the public should similarly maintain a good habit for consuming information. They should get used to consulting fact-checking organizations to identify and stop the spread of the virus. In the end, opinion leaders, especially political leaders, should be the one to educate the public. For those refusing to adopt the fact-checking habit, we should discredit them and be alert to what they say, for they may use rumors as a political tool to fuel a social movement.

          The author is research officer of the One Country Two Systems Research Institute.

          The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.

          Most Viewed in 24 Hours
          Top
          BACK TO THE TOP
          English
          Copyright 1994 - . All rights reserved. The content (including but not limited to text, photo, multimedia information, etc) published in this site belongs to China Daily Information Co (CDIC). Without written authorization from CDIC, such content shall not be republished or used in any form. Note: Browsers with 1024*768 or higher resolution are suggested for this site.
          License for publishing multimedia online 0108263

          Registration Number: 130349
          FOLLOW US
          主站蜘蛛池模板: 国产精品视频免费一区二区三区| 欧美三级不卡在线观线看高清| 午夜通通国产精品福利| av中文无码乱人伦在线观看| 亚洲国产成人无码av在线播放 | 99九九视频高清在线| 人妻日韩精品中文字幕| 中文字幕日韩有码国产| 高清视频一区二区三区| 亚洲精品一区二区三区不| 欧美性猛交xxxx免费看| 成在人线av无码免费看网站直播 | 久久国产福利国产秒拍| 少妇人妻偷人一区二区| 伊人色综合网久久天天| 中文字幕一区二区三区麻豆| 国产精品人成视频免| 久久精品国产亚洲av高| 1769国内精品视频在线播放| 无码中文字幕热热久久| 国产日韩在线亚洲色视频| 一本久道久久综合狠狠躁av| 亚洲爆乳WWW无码专区| a级毛片视频免费观看| 国产精品区一区第一页| 国产精品青草视频免费播放| a在线观看视频在线播放| 亚洲中文字幕aⅴ天堂| 国产一区二区三区麻豆视频| 国产精品自在自线免费观看| 热久久这里只有精品国产| 亚洲av专区一区| 久久人妻精品大屁股一区| 日本一区二区精品色超碰| 成人无码一区二区三区网站| 久久婷婷丁香五月综合五| 又爆又大又粗又硬又黄的a片| 欧美国产日产一区二区| 制服丝袜亚洲欧美中文字幕| 四虎影视一区二区精品| av天堂亚洲区无码先锋影音|