星期四, 5月 26, 2005
I have read your article today firing on the new regulation of application for pubic housing on the single applicants. I must say i strongly agree with you. I am a reporter from Chinese media, but it seems that large proportion of chinese media do show their support on the new move by the Housing Authority. Most of them are viewing the issue from the resources allocation angle, few of them is really discussing about whether the new regulation is really fair or not.
Personally, I think discrimination on family status and academic qualification is obvious. As these single appilcants passed the mean test, they should be able to make the application while wether they will get the public house is another issue. Thus, I propse that young and single one should be given chance to make application, but allocation of public house should be subjected to the social condition.
Public housing is long be a problem for HK government, but I request a system in which everyone is fairly treated.
However, when i talked about my point of view with other reporters, i found almost all are against my view. They think the young and highly educated one should not abuse the social resources as they are expected to earn much later on. I fully understand their opinion (as i am the young and highly educated one too), but the core of the issue is not lying on wether you will be rich or not, it's a problem of the fairness of the system, isn't it?
It is pity to see that fairness and justice is getting thinner in Hong Kong nowaday. People are concerning about their material need rather than basic ideology(or core value, u may say).
Anyway, It's good to see your opinion, let share more next time.
(original an email to the editor of a newspaper)
It reminds me of how magazine approach a story. Magazine is different from the conventional daily. Instead of setting a POV after having all the fact analysed, Magazine is making the hypothesis first. Thus, when a reporter is told to write a report, actually, he is doing a job of collecting evidence in order to support the hypothesis. So when he finds one person's POV is favourable to him, there may be 9 people interviewed with counter-POV.
As a result, an article based on hypothesis rather than hard fact or ideology, together with biased and subjective POV is getting published. Do they really face the problem? face the fact?
Too arrogant the system is and reporters as well. I mean do they really qualified to make such a hypothesis?
I suppose not, the truth is that more senior position the reporter is promoted to, s/he will be more defensive to any doubt on their judgement and opinion, as they can't afford their profession to be challenged. But what if they are really wrong? Clearly, s/he is trapped by her own position and any new idea won't be welcomed to flush in. Stupid, isn't it?
Please always remind yourself to be humble.
星期三, 5月 18, 2005
星期六, 5月 07, 2005
「時尚」 -- 近年於國內非常風行的名詞，「趕時尚」亦是許多上海人，特別是上海女人，的真實寫照。
「香 水」一個時尚的包裝底下，推銷的還是老掉牙的城市愛情故事。借用香水，角色間互相錯摸，離離合合卻了無新意，臨尾錯摸性向一段，更顯得索強空洞。整體而言， 劇本流於表面，近乎沒有命題。小聰明小技巧雖然有掩眼作用，但仍無法掩蓋劇本的蒼白，皮膚不好，再好的粉底也於事無補。
上 海自上世紀初，己被譽為東方巴黎，拿今日上海浦東的東方明珠塔與艾菲爾鐵塔相比，這稱號雖然依然合用，但不免顯得有點浮誇粗疏。一個拿香水，拿法國做題材 的華文舞台劇，即使背景改作香港，但觀眾閉著眼，也能嗅著濃濃的沪味，洋化、媚外、物質、愛時尚，卻同時彌漫著一陣生誘味。