香港人與王維基非親非故。
王維基開電視台是做生意，製作方針以娛樂節目為主。
他已經講明，對政治沒興趣，大家也不用對他有甚麼「擔當社會使命為己任」的期望。
他親中，已經做了某省的政協多年。
今日圍政總，不是為了王維基，而是為了這個漠視民意，欺負全香港市民的不發牌的決定，剝奪了他們最起碼的娛樂和選擇權利。
梁振英只是傀儡，幕後操盤的是他阿爺，這次是赤裸裸的不相信香港人，粗暴干涉香港人生活的行動。
圍政總，不會令王維基重獲牌照。今日出來的人愈多，梁振英的阿爺會更心怯，以為王維基更危險，愈是不會發牌。
圍政總是表達香港人的不滿，要他們不得安枕。
梁振英上任以來，自己的僭建、陳茂波、國民教育、水貨客、張震遠、南丫島海難、劉夢熊、湯顯明、林慧思、愛港力、青關會、黑社會、菲律賓、幼稚園學位.....有些是前朝的問題而他沒有兌現競選承諾去解決，大部分是他自己的問題，一件接一件，現在就是等最後壓斷駱駝背的一根稻草。
Like支持王維基申請牌照的網頁的人已近五十萬，有十分之一的人走出來也有五萬。今日星期天，明日開始，日間要上班的人上班，要上學的上學，晚上來接力。
為人為己，圍佢滷味！
(文章允許轉貼，請具作者名字：梁煥松)
............
political issues can only be resolved by massive political moves, man!! but, what next?! still we cannot see an alternative to the core for all these sheets that has been barring the majority happiness from the governed, man!
回覆刪除這個政府與民為敵，無得救。
回覆刪除極權統治者之下，人民不理政治，無所謂，最好是做食飽之後任由宰割的豬。
回覆刪除極權統治者之下，傳媒不理政治，無可能。非友即敵，傳媒不向極權靠攏，做極權的傳聲筒，已經被判有罪。
香港傳媒仍未支持政府者，所餘無幾。恐怕過不了多少年，香港的報紙都會變成有如新加坡的聯合早報或The Straits Times，悲哀！
刪除閣下說話有點不客氣哦。。。什麼叫「人民不理政治。。。任由宰割的豬」？我說一早移民的，是因為「對政治感到有心無力，就狗跳窮巷，夾著尾巴溜了。。。」又如何？
刪除政治理想，各有不同，民主不單是包容各種意念，亦是尊重別人的選擇。我們針對的應是行為，不是因為別人的政治信念跟你閣下分歧，就是你有智有謀，別人就茍且偷安。。。
唉！
人民不理政治，最後是做食飽之後任由宰割的豬。說得對，因為有兩個或以上的人一起，就會有政治問題，你選擇放棄不理，讓別人代表了你，也是一種政治表態，所以沉默的大多數是豬。
刪除但只要沈默的那班沒怨懟，皇帝不急你太監急？唉！
刪除豬不是皇帝，既然社會上有很多豬，不出來分豬肉就太笨了
刪除狐假虎威想出來分豬肉，小心背後哦。。。
刪除exactly what Plato had described in ancient time, man, having classified the governed into namely Gold, Silver and Bronze...the grassroots were nick-named as `pig-men' too, man!!!
刪除@Bob: 贈君六字：獻醜不如藏拙。
刪除Plato 在天之靈，哭笑不得。。。
我不會取笑意見分歧或無知（天下知識浩瀚，誰不無知？），但當「無知」成為討論論點，那就別怪人笑你沒自知之明！
閣下請再閱讀一下 Plato 的 The Replublic。。。我斗膽建議閣下去閱讀中文版，有可能提升你的理解能力。。。
我認為發不發牌給王維基不是重點，重點是政府不肯公開不發牌的「理據」，給予巿民自己衡量是否「合理」。。。梁特首一句「商業秘密」，就算對市民交待了決策原因？這敷衍，也太不放港民在眼內吧？你死不公開原因，我們就有合理懷疑，信最壞最陰險之陰謀論。。。失信於民，失天下矣！
回覆刪除圍到冚哂, 圍佢幾个星期. --zpdrmn
回覆刪除會不會演變成佔中呢 ?
回覆刪除政治事件是不能預先採排的,
等睇好戲 !
HORAI：是我說得不清楚,我的意思是指極權者的心意, 人民最好這樣.
回覆刪除既是誤會，那沒問題。
回覆刪除>> ... 只是傀儡，幕後操盤的是他阿爺...
回覆刪除從前個阿爺祇是一班鄉下佬， 係有 (好多) 人不斷教精佢，比佢 buy 到 time (，"飯民"都有份)。從前阿爺 從來都祇得一招 : "you tell me all my options and let me decide"。依家係 "do as what I say"。死未。
將統治香港的中國殖民者稱呼做阿爺是一種奴性的表現。
刪除所以我說「梁振英的阿爺」。
刪除Before "阿爺", there was "老佛爺", i.e. Mainland in still like Ching Dynasty.
刪除「梁振英的阿爺」, i.e. 「佢阿爺」... 好句 ! 好句 !
市民向政府直接表達意見, 完全有理有必要.
回覆刪除一位異人對我說, 那座政府大廈隱藏大問題, 它佔地廣樓頂高, 其地位應為香港社會的大腦. 然而樓體中間大部份卻空空如也, 實乃凶象. 觀乎內中要人, 不少似已患上阿茲海默症. 我對玄學甚疑, 卻對該廈頗具戒心 !
政府總部這座建築物，像一個「門」字。
刪除裡面行的卻是「西」環的指令.....
那個大門一路向西....加埋就係一個對689施政而言既最佳形容辭(廣州話)。
刪除從龍和道望入，左側形似列隊歡型既土共隊伍，啡紅色既行政長官辦公室，則是躲在門後的門僮而矣。
香港已死！
回覆刪除現今的香港政府專出產欄坦與仆街,太監英根本是心理變態,你越閙他越開心,你吹得佢漲咩!
回覆刪除不過除了保皇派外,香港仍然有很多懞佬懞婆視他為偶像.
林鄭月娥與林煥光的風骨亦隨狠而去,晚節不保,真悲哀!
There were a few good articles about this in the South China Morning Post of 16 October 2013. Here is one of them:
回覆刪除http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1332598/free-air-tv-still-question-marks-over-whether-shows-will-improve
(王維基)他已經講明，對政治沒興趣，大家也不用對他有甚麼「擔當社會使命為己任」的期望。
回覆刪除唔記得許仕仁係邊個場合講過，回歸前政治唔關我地事，但回歸後你想保持住依個心態就你死你事。你唔玩政治，政治玩你呀。
正好解釋了是次事件的主因……
First they came for the communists,
回覆刪除and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.
Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.
by： pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984)
每次見到身穿飛機恤，滿口鄉音，幾肯定佢唔識英文嘅行政會議成員，鄭妖糖，出來噏嘢，就好 x 憤怒。
回覆刪除做得行政會議成員，不同政治理念 OK ，但文化水平至少有個最低標準，要求大學畢業同識英文並不太過份吧。
把香港比喻為一企業，你是老細，會揀呢條杏加橙入董事局嗎。
香港人夠竟做錯咩事，要受呢班友管治。
1967年工聯會是土共反英暴動的核心成員，有人死，有人被警察打，有人坐監，1997 守得雲開見月明。
刪除楊光攞返個狗餅,一天光晒啦,
刪除回想當日，董建華一上任就頒大紫荊給楊廣，香港人就應該預料到有今日。
刪除很多人做夢做了十幾年，現在才醒。
有人還未醒。
未醒者，包括『新香港人』，這班人不知道、不明白香港發生了甚麼！
刪除相信，現今行政會議開會時，講的是廣東話！但是倘若文件是英文，有若干行政會議成員會看不明白，或根本屬有字天書。這類人，開會時，吹吹水，然後按指示投票！
刪除兩會的英文文件，一定附有譯本，不過有些人的程度，加上無心做，給他們也不會細看。
刪除諗起關德興師傅，在無數「黃飛鴻」電影中的一句話，「冤冤相報何時了」。
回覆刪除非常贊成！少點粗口應可更理性討論。
刪除市民遊行，是由梁振英政府的惡行迫出來的。始作俑者，就是特區政府及大陸。
刪除你地講少D得唔得 咁多遊行你唔悶我都悶 又唔係無馬跑 又唔係舞唔準跳 少D電視台會死麼
回覆刪除我不賭馬，不跳舞，只想晚上看免費電視時有多點選擇，有甚麼不對！
刪除電視比跑馬和跳舞更與民生有關係。
刪除don't let this trap all you guys there and forget all about the Filipino case, man, which is exactly what they want, man!!!!
回覆刪除大話冚大話，危機冚危機，梁振英有他一套。
刪除香港人善忘，in a way , it works.
現在已無乜人講陳茂波和菲律賓了。
Did I fail to read something? I do not quite understand what the fuss is all about. A businessman submitted a bid for a TV license and his bid was rejected. This kind of bidding and rejection happen thousand times in HK every day. What is the big deal? Now HK people are up in their arms crying foul.
回覆刪除The businessman Mr. Wong must be very happy that he can motivate so much public support without much of his own efforts. I do not see he explains why he should get the license. Does he think he is entitled to it? He never explains how his proposal can benefit the HK people. The HK people and media are now on his side without knowing what good will come from him, if he succeeded.
Samson
Ontario, Canada
In short, Mr Wong claimed to have been encouraged by Donald Tsang's government, leading to his vast investment in the TV industry even before receiving a TV license. After waited for 3 or 4 years, Mr Wong had to shut down most of his TV departments due to not able to receive one of the two new TV licenses, among three bidders.
刪除689 fails to issue new TV license to Mr Wong's company creates a doubt if HK government breaks its tradition, and don't have to honor its previous policies when Chief Executive changes hands. Indirectly, this is ruining HK's business environment and reputation.
Also this exposes "whether 689 & his committee are taking up more power than they are entitled to, by not disclosing enough information for the public".
Further, business people doubted 689's government's claim that issuing the third new TV license now would have negative effects on the TV industry (as 689's government speculated that one more new license would cause some TV company to go bankrupted leading to unwanted social effects).
HK people see it as fairness has been violated, people's right to choose has been violated, and HK government is taking up China's way of controlling media.
>> I do not see he explains why he should get the license.
He only request HK government to disclose information on how & why his company failed to receive a license.
>> Does he think he is entitled to it?
Yes if he was misled by Donald Tsang's government.
>> He never explains how his proposal can benefit the HK people.
He promised to create better shows, providing more "options" to viewers.
To Mr. Nth
回覆刪除It is nice to know that we are reading the same blogs.
(1) It might be true that Mr Wong received an invitation from Mr Tseng’s staff. That is why he is one of the bidders. It is not clear what promises that staff gave Mr. Wong. However, Mr. Wong is a shrewd and seasoned businessman. It would be naïve of him to take this kind of call or promise seriously no matter how high the caller’s position.
(2) The consequential effects you described due to rejecting Mr. Wong the license are a bit far fetched. I do not believe other investors will pause to do business in HK because of a TV license drama.
(3) CY Leung and Co. made a judgemental decision in their Executive Council for not to issue the license to Mr Wong. They are authorised to do so under the law and there is no abuse of power by CY and Co.
(4) There is no evidence that Mr Wong was ill or unfairly treated in the bidding process. Mr Wong will surely make a big issue of it if it is the case.
(5) The Executive Council is equivalent to a cabinet of a country or a board of directors of a company. I am not aware any cabinet meeting or board meeting is public information anywhere. Why would anyone demand CY to disclose their discussion in the Exec Council meetings? CY has no obligation to do so. There may be a secrecy law to govern the meeting.
(6) If Mr. Wong thinks he is entitled for a license then that will be unfair to other bidders and an insult to all HK people. Who he thinks he is to have this entitlement? Even the Royals in the Colonial days do not claim openly an entitlement. He thinks he is superior to anyone else?
(7) Anyone believes a promise from a shrewd businessman like Mr Wong will believe anything. Words are cheap. I believe his promises when I see the deeds.
Samson
Ontario, Canada
Hi Samson,
刪除As a small citizen, I would love to see if/how Mr Wong could change HK TV industry. As for the other two bidders, PCCW & Cable TV, both are already running paid-TV channels in HK. I doubt that they would develop good & new TV programs for us, except to broadcasted old shows from their paid-TV channels, or to buy from HK's production companies (such as from Wong Jing, etc.)
About 689, the problem is that HK people don't **trust** that he would make decision for the benefits of the general public, over his own hidden agenda, if any. We do that based on our "experience" with him.
Since 689 knows that he has "Trust" issue, he should be wiser in handling the current matter.
About his committee members, HK people knows that most of them were appointed due to being "梁粉", rather than having good skills, knowledge & experiences.
689 is obligated to do something when protest of such scale happened. One of such thing is to disclose the selection criteria, and the pros-n-cons about each bidder, without disclosing "who-said-what". If they were making decision fairly and justly, why not presents the case to the Legislative Council under "closed-door", if they are TOO concerned to show them to the general public.
>> (2) The consequential effects you described due to rejecting Mr. Wong the license are a bit far fetched.
I just relay the info I heard from some critics on the HK TV or radio, which I cannot recall. The criticism was also based on the bad policies created by 689 so far (e.g SSD real-estate tax).
>> ... Mr. Wong is a shrewd and seasoned businessman. ...
Whether Mr Wong gets a license or not is not HK people's 1st concern, as we (or just I??) only want to find a substitute to replace ATV... it is the strangeness of the "process" so far. Since we have heard about the new TV licenses for years, and 689 had never disclosed any info for the general public. We (or just I ??) didn't know that 689 would issue 1, 2 or 3 new licenses until now.
To small citizen like me, each of the three bidders are shrewd and seasoned. Also, "shrewd and seasoned" would be a "biased" statement to reject a valid premise. (As otherwise, it would commit a logical fallacy.)
>> (4) ...
Mr Wong said that he will file a law suit.
>> (6) If Mr. Wong thinks he is entitled...
What we and the critics query is "why not issuing 3 license, one for each bidder"? If each of them has the money to burn, let them burn it. And all of us would eat peanuts, while watching the "firework".
-
Before I walked on Sunday, I didn't expect for such a crowd. So it was a really a shocking event -> so many of us protest just for a free-TV license !!! Can you believe that could happen in US/Canada ?
唔可以咁比較。。。美國免費電視台主要有三個大台，但加埋其它細台，有六，七個。而好多人有付費電視，因為美國地大，唔係度度可以收天缐收得清，所以好多人有所謂 cable，咁就真係閒閒地三四十個台囉！
刪除而最重要嘅係，就算係有相同情況，政府官員敢唔回應民意？一個漠視民意嘅政府，選民真太嬲可以要求投票即時免佢職，即 recall of state officials（州政府），總統喇喎就冇符，但你同你個政黨四年後必定付出代價，這就是人民的籌碼。
題外話...
刪除Not until the current event exploded, I didn't know that my family wasn't alone with our opinions towards the "May姐 雞汁 哈哈哈" phenomenon. What a relief.
@Samson: 我估閣下不是在民主國家長大。因為閣下不明白民主政制的核心精神。
回覆刪除巿民不質疑政府的每一個決定或政策，是市民的選擇，不是巿民沒有權這樣做。政府不是天賜的管治者，巿民只能信，不准問。當有太多巿民質疑政府的某一個決定，政府就有責任向市民解釋決策背後的理據，讓巿民衡量是否公義公正。這是政府的責任，因為最終授管治權給你的，是人民。你的職位，只是一個程序上的過客，不是聖上。
當然，若閣下的拗點是：「香港不是民主社會，是中共專政，黨的最高領導既決定了，有必要向人民交待嗎？吵什麼吵？」Then you win this argument. 因為這是事實，我無言。
If Mr Wong considers himself to be the saviour for the HK TV industry and wants to win wider support for him, he should tell HK public that how much money he is going to invest for new programmes in the next five years; what ‘new’ programmes he is proposing, how many viewers he estimates to have; what revenues he expect to receive to balance the book, who is going to monitor his promises; when he fails to deliver, what kind of penalties he is prepared to give to the HK people for their support and on and on. It is not enough to just waving hands and shouting to CY &Co. “Mr Wong is a good guy. Give him his entitled license.”
回覆刪除Yes, CY has a credibility issue with HK people. Objection to his every move of running the government is not going to remove him from office. Since no one in HK dares to advocate a revolution and HK people have no patience for reformation, street protest with or without cause may be the only way to vent their frustration. After a tiring day in the street/office "May姐 雞汁 哈哈哈" may be a better psychological treatment for people.
Nevertheless, HK still needs someone to run the administration. CY is doing this thankless job. Citizens may demand many things from him. However, every citizen must abide by the law of the land. HK is still governed by the rule of law. Things must be done through due process. This is democracy all about. I suspect no one in HK wants mobocracy.
Samson
Ontario, Canada
//梁振英上任以來，自己的僭建、陳茂波、國民教育、水貨客、張震遠、南丫島海難、劉夢熊、湯顯明、林慧思、愛港力、青關會、黑社會、菲律賓、幼稚園學位.....有些是前朝的問題而他沒有兌現競選承諾去解決，大部分是他自己的問題，一件接一件，現在就是等最後壓斷駱駝背的一根稻草。//
回覆刪除一男子又懷念這曲 "究竟應該點?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApVaX74qkLM
@Samson: I believe you're basically saying: yeah, you're screwed, realize it, deal with it. While it may be true that under a dictatorship, there is nothing we can conceivably do to remove CY, but never underestimate the power of intangibles, as in the court of public (global) opinion. There is also a term called "social critical mass", beyond which lies the point of no return, when no one can predict or control what happens, and HK is getting dangerously close to that threshold.
回覆刪除I personally don't care whether Ricky Wong gets his license, but I do care about the arrogance of CY, his callous wanton attitude that he is beyond reproach, that he can do whatever he damn well pleases (regulatory action with no specifics forthcoming), public outcry, kiss my ass！OK, CY wants to push hard to test the boundaries? He who sows the wind shall reap the whirlwind, when push comes to shove, let's see who has the last laugh.
I'm the poster child for what you would call the benevolent middle class, the silent "objective" majority who is always ready to give people the benefit of the doubt, and I, in this case, am pissed. Not a good sign, CY...
Horai,
回覆刪除It is not my habit to use insulting language such as name calling in a blog discussion.
You have a point to consider the situation in HK being dangerously grave. How possibly HK people face a turmoil administration incident every few months? I cannot foretell what common people will do under these circumstances. There is no doubt that there are a certain percentage of people withdrawing to their sanctuary to heal their mental wounds. Some people may return to their home facing the “May姐 雞汁 哈哈哈 without having to think the CY and Co. and his marvellous services to the motherland. Some, who refuse to accept the situation, may plan to overthrow the table in the Legislature Building and drive the officers away with a whip. When this happens the PLA get their chances that they waited for 16 years. Let us not fool ourselves about the barrel of a gun. No HK Kung Fu masters can stop the flying bullets in Nathan Road.
HK people may be fed up with CY and want him replaced. However, as the saying goes, be careful what you wish for, you may get it. Will CY’s replacement any better and more public pleasing? May be or may not be. It is hard to speculate. Knowing the nature of the Beijing regime, I would say it is unlikely they will loose grip on HK. Human life means nothing to them. It is just a number. How about international opinions, you may ask. Look at this way. Have you ever seen a powerful nation (US, China, Russia, even Japan) who yield to world opinions for a change of domestic policy? I am older than you. I could not think of a single event to refute myself.
Obviously I cannot write a long thesis here. I hope you get what I try to say. In short CY and his successors are not going to change. HK people need to change themselves in order to keep their own sanity.
Samson
Ontario, Canada
I believe China, in exchange for a protest-free (international protests) 2008 Olympics, did in fact very quietly capitulate on a number of issues. Anyway, no one in HK is expecting a "all or nothing" reform, let's fight our war one battle at a time...
回覆刪除You're confusing political white noise with genuine discontent. There're only a few truly controversial issues in HK that qualify as bona fide unresolved uproars: TV License, Paul Chan, Universal Suffrage rules. Learn to separate legit concerns from hyped-up political rhetoric. Even China would choose her battles wisely, CY could very well end up the fall guy...
Enough said, tippin' back a little vodka as the saga unfolds....