Joseph Pak

Professor McCarthy

ENGW1111

In-Between The Lines

In articles and journals, the ideas that sway our minds are many times not in plain sight

but instead in-between the lines. This is especially relevant to modern media such as television,

social media, and news outlets, in which bias is extremely prevalent. Articles concerning the

Hong Kong protests show the extent of biases in media due to the protests’ controversial nature.

Hong Kong protesters believe that China has started to encroach on their freedoms and rights

through proposals that would allow extradition to mainland China. Despite the proposals being

suspended, the people still demand full democracy and an inquiry into police actions, causing the

protests to rage on. As a controversial event, media outlets all over the world such as the ​BBC​,

the ​New York Times​, and the ​South China Morning Post​ have put out their own versions of the

story. While the ​BBC​ stays relatively unbiased, the ​New York Times ​and​ South China Morning

Post ​have their own distinct agendas to use their great influence in the media to foster either

support for or opposition against Hong Kong protesters.

While the ​BBC ​is relatively unbiased, the bias in the ​New York Times​ and the ​South

China Morning Post​ stem from the funding and audience. Although the ​BBC,​ a British

government-owned media outlet, has had previous involvement in Hong Kong which may seem

to relate on how they see the protests, they made sure to keep the news as neutral as possible.

The ​BBC​ article states, “​until 1997, Hong Kong was a British colony - meaning it was controlled

by Britain” which take up about a tenth of their 100 word summary of the protests. Their
emphasis on the past British control of Hong Kong may represents a slight resentment against

Hong Kong, but not enough to effect the bias in the writing. ​As they try not to take any sides

such as in the case of the Hong Kong protests, the ​BBC​ news has been relatively straight-forward

compared to The ​New York Times​ that seems to contain bias in support of the Hong Kong

protesters. The ​New York Times​ is a publicly-traded company that gets most of its funding from

advertisements and digital subscriptions. Most of the readers and subscriptions come from

young, educated Americans mainly residing in the New York Metropolitan Area. Because the

paper tends to have a more liberal worldview, its news contains bias that is pro-protests such as

the pro-Occupy Wall Street movement against large corporations. On the other hand, the ​South

China Morning Post​, an Alibaba-owned newspaper, attempts to undermine the argument for the

civilian protests in Hong Kong. China’s Alibaba can be compared to the American multinational

company, Amazon, as it is one of the ​world's largest retailers, e-commerce, internet, and AI

companies while also being one of the largest venture capital firms and investment corporations

in the world making it highly tied with the Chinese government. Therefore, its pro-establishment

and pro-business nature seems to create bias to influence the people’s support and views on the

image of the Chinese government while also trying to improve the environment for the private

sector by undermining the protesters.

Even the slightest difference in diction can display the bias in a media outlet. The ​New

York Times​ begins with their description of China as an “autocratic Chinese government,” which

emphasizes their views against China and support for the protests. The word autocratic, which

refers to a ruler who has absolute power, has a negative connotation which opposes China’s

official name as the “People’s Republic Of China.” The ​Times​ seems to call attention to the idea
that China is not truly a country for its people but a country owned by its leader. The ​Times ​later

supports this idea by explaining that the Beijing-appointed chief executive of Hong Kong, Carrie

Lam, bypassed Hong Kong’s partially elected legislature and single-handedly banned the face

masks worn by protesters. China’s failure to keep their promise to allow Hong Kong to be

autonomous and democratic reveals how “for the people” they really are. In the ​South China

Morning Post,​ the reporter describes the protesters as “anti-government protesters” which is an

incorrect interpretation of the motivations of the Hong Kong citizens. ​BBC,​ the non-bias article,

explains the true reason for the protests which comes from their motto “Five demands, not one

less!” None of these demands represent an anti-government sentiment, only for reasonable

freedoms and democracy such as “implementation of completely universal suffrage” and “an

inquiry into alleged police brutality.” The ​Post’s ​twists on just a few words represent the intent

to weaken the support for protesters.

In the three articles, the headlines give readers the first glimpse into the paper’s angle. In

BBC​, the headline is called “The Hong Kong protests explained in 100 and 500 words,”

indicating a brief, straightforward, tell-of-events that gets to the point. Additionally,

sub-headlines such as “What do the protesters want?” and “How did the protests escalate?”

indicate that both Hong Kong’s and China’s perspectives are included, respectively. Meanwhile,

in the ​South China Morning Post​ article, the headline states “Hong Kong protesters go on yet

another rampage, attacking police, meting out mob justice and trashing train stations and

mainland China-linked businesses.” The headline attempts to portray the protests as excessively

violent, as uses words such as “rampage” and “mob justice”. The aggressive tone of this headline

is a bias to try and undermine the protesters in the ​South China Morning Post​ is easily
identifiable. Also, in the ​New York Times​ article, the headline reads “What’s Happening With the

Hong Kong Protests?”, which is then followed by another headline saying “The demonstrations

created the Chinese territory’s worst political crisis in years, ensnaring Beijing.” It may be that

by stating that these protests have had an unfavorable outcome for the Chinese (Beijing), it

casually creates an unconscious backing for these protesters without even starting to read the

article. This bias from the Times makes sense knowing that the recent U.S. relations with the

Chinese are not going well, meaning that Americans reading this article will most likely favor

those opposing China.

The bias is showcased in both the ​New York Times​ and the ​South China Morning Post

through their use of photography and filmography. The neutral ​BBC​ article contains only one

photo which only shows the policemen wearing and holding helmets, gas masks, riot shields, and

batons. Perhaps the ​BBC​ chose this photo as it does not show either the police or protesters

actively doing anything to stay as neutral as possible.

Meanwhile, the ​New York Times​ uses multiple pictures to showcase a timeline of the

events occurring in Hong Kong. However, what seems to stick out in this article is the use of
juxtaposition with one of the photos showcasing the inauguration ceremony for Hong Kong’s

Chief Executive, Carrie Lam, to a rally in Hong Kong where the people were calling for the US

Congress to pass the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act.

While Lam’s executive council looks to be all raising their hands as an act of submission towards

China’s leader, Xi Jinping, Carrie Lam is seen to be behind everyone else in the back which may

be subtly trying to emphasize that China’s leader is the one truly in power of Hong Kong’s

government with Hong Kong holding onto little of the power — one of the main reasons for the

protests. All the while, China’s flag is seen to be right in the center of the inauguration.
On the other hand, in the photo of the rally, multiple American flags are being held up by the

citizens which not only creates a juxtaposition with the two flags, but a juxtaposition between the

upper-class government officials who look to be submitting to China’s will and the protesters

fighting for their country against China’s control. Perhaps, this juxtaposition created by the ​New

York Times​ may be an effort to try and bring in support for those protesting against China

because it goes along with their agenda. In the ​South China Morning Post​ article in his trial

against the protests in Hong Kong, it starts off the article with a photo of a protester setting fire

to what looks like an ATM.

The photos that follow all continue to follow the trend of showing the protesters destroying and

vandalizing property all over Hong Kong. Its intended effect may really be to show the world
how “inhumane” and violent protesters are in a way to support China’s reasoning to fight against

these protests. However, at the end of the article, the post decides to discuss a peaceful protest by

showing a picture of protesters leaving paper cranes around. Readers tend to judge the beginning

of a story to be more significant than the end. This idea of an “inverted pyramid” means that

readers are less likely to read the last part. As the beginning and most of the article discusses the

tragedies and violence that has occured in Hong Kong, the last paragraph of the article finally

talks about the tranquil part of the protests. Therefore, this article shows bias through placement

as they bury the “peaceful” the bottom of the article in order to highlight the argument against

the protesters

The bias in the ​New York Times a​ nd the ​South China Morning Po​s​t​ uses media to support

or oppose the protests, respectively. The​ BBC​ presents a relatively neutral view by using a

straightforward tone, headline, and photography, while the ​Times​ and ​Post​ relies on rhetoric to

impose their agenda on the public. Although the writing itself does outright have bias, the slight
differences in writers choices is for the intended audience and supports their funding. To ignore

these biases can many times give a one-sided perspective, but by noticing them, there is a clear

truth to what is being said.

 Works Cited

“Hong Kong Protesters Go on Rampage Again, Attacking Police and Property.” ​South

China Morning Post,​ 17 Oct. 2019,

www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/society/article/3032749/hong-kong-protesters-go-yet-another-r

ampage-attacking-police​.

“The Hong Kong Protests Explained in 100 and 500 Words.” ​BBC News​, BBC, 14 Oct.

2019, ​www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-49317695​.

Victor, Daniel, and Mike Ives. “What's Happening With the Hong Kong Protests?” ​The

New York Times​, The New York Times, 15 Oct. 2019,

www.nytimes.com/2019/10/15/world/asia/what-are-hong-kong-protests-about.html.