,
8 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
This is a really tendentious article by the New York Times that makes me question their other Hong Kong coverage. The story the past week isn't an increase in violence by protesters against people; it's a police rampage in which cops shot two schoolkids. nytimes.com/2019/10/07/wor…
"The protesters have also begun setting more and more street blazes, which send plumes of black smoke swirling through Hong Kong’s urban canyons" and which firefighters put out within minutes, allowed past barricades with cheers by the crowd, this Pulitzer-seeker forgot to add.
I am not going to defend every action by Hong Kong demonstrators, especially stuff I didn't witness. But reporting on a rise in violence against property without providing the key context—that it is a response to escalating state violence against people—is profoundly dishonest.
The last thing I'll say about this article is the notion of a "hard core" of protesters is kind of problematic. A lot of the early frontliners were arrested or for other reasons can't show up. It is when there are few experienced people that the worst incidents seem to happen
There is no avenue left for peaceful protest in Hong Kong. Not only are permits now denied, but the authorities shut down public transit to try to prevent them. They passed a mask ban to prevent them. They want the protests to turn more violent so they can ratchet up repression
Hong Kong is not a violent society. The frontliners out there are not violent people. Watch them in action sometime—they suck at arson, throw bricks underhanded, do their homework off in a corner. These are desperation tactics by a population that has been given no other choice
Let's also remember why the protests are leaderless. It's because the 2014 leaders, including some who sat down to debate with Carrie Lam on television, got sent to jail. Several were re-sentenced after Beijing decided the original sentences were too lenient. Context matters.
There is incredible journalism being done here, including by @nytimes reporters, but what reaches the front page is bad. David Brooks bullshit, articles like this on "escalating violence", descriptions of emergency law as a "measured step". And we have no public editor to turn to
