Walter's Blog |
|
Reflections on recent events, plus the occasional fact free rant unfiltered by rational argument.
|
|
"If you want to read a blog to get a sense of what is going on in Hong Kong these days or a blog that would tell you what life was like living in colonial Hong Kong, this blog, WALTER'S BLOG, fits the bill." Hong Kong Blog Review
|
|
26/11/2025 0 Comments Disaster in Tai Po "Those responsible for the circumstances that created the risk must be held accountable for their decisions..." As I write this blog, the fires at Wang Fuk Court in Tai Po continue to burn. Media reports tell me that 13 are dead, with many more critically injured. Those numbers are likely to be higher once a complete account is given. Meanwhile, distressed residents are desperately searching for missing relatives, which should inspire our collective concern and compassion. For the past two years, as a Tai Po resident, I’ve passed Wang Fuk Court, wrapped in bamboo and green plastic netting during renovations. I’d assumed the blocks were empty of residents. Therefore, I am shocked to discover that someone considered it acceptable to keep tenants in situ despite the apparent dangers. Have no lessons been learnt from the Grenfell Tower fire in London? Sure, it is premature to say what caused the fire. But what is certain is that once it took hold, controlling it proved extremely difficult for our brave firemen. That one has lost his life is a testimont to the dangers. Undoubtedly, there will be a thorough enquiry into this tragic incident. Those responsible for the circumstances that created the risk must be held accountable for their decisions, especially choosing to leave tenants, including vulnerable elderly residents, in place. Risks must no longer be ignored, especially in Hong Kong with its many high-rise buildings. It is essential that the government takes decisive action to understand what happened and lead safety improvements. Update: As dawn breaks, the fires are still burning although increasingly under control. 36 are confirmed dead and at least 279 are missing. Three people are under arrest on suspicion of 'manslaughter'. Meanwhile, the city is in shock.
0 Comments
23/11/2025 0 Comments LegCo - All Change! "If Hong Kong aims to cultivate political talent, then fresh blood is essential." It's election season in Hong Kong. Elections? Yes, Hong Kong holds elections for the Legislative Council and district councils. On 7 December, we will vote to elect 90 LegCo members. Among serving lawmakers, 35 have decided to step down and not stand for re-election. Some commentators have called this an exodus, suggesting that councillors are either being encouraged to step down or are dissatisfied with the system. Although the turnover of LegCo members is marginally higher than usual, it is important to note that 12 of these 22 are over 70 years old and have served lengthy terms. It’s time for them to step aside. This change could bring new perspectives and approaches to governance, offering a hopeful outlook for our city's future. After all, if Hong Kong aims to cultivate political talent, then fresh blood is essential. These days, LegCo sessions receive less media attention, a welcome change now that the disruptive radicals and their antics are history. The era of shouting, throwing objects, physical skirmishes, and other attention-seeking behaviours in the chamber has ended, and we can all breathe a sigh of relief. A LegCo member snatching a female official's phone, fleeing to hide in the male toilets, and flicking through her messages was not the worst behaviour. That qualification should be reserved for the two young legislators who chose to insult the entire nation by invoking the Japanese name for occupied China when they were sworn in. These immature, foolish, and crass remarks earned them justifiable widespread condemnation. They knew their words poked a raw nerve. Even former Governor Chris Patten came out to criticise the pair, asserting their antics “… make a mockery of a serious political argument.” Later, the duo abandoned their taxpayer-funded offices, leaving behind crates of half-consumed alcohol and new, expensive game consoles, demonstrating that their priorities were never to serve as diligent representatives of the people. On 15 November 2016, the court disqualified the two legislators for failing to take their oaths "faithfully and truthfully." They attempted to force their way into the LegCo chamber, injuring security staff in the process. Both were convicted and served brief prison sentences. Subsequently, one fled to the U.S., and the other disappeared from public life. "With the highest life expectancy on the planet, we can take pride in the safety and quality of life our city offers. Despite the critics, it is clear that Hong Kong is doing many things right." It is also possible to draw a direct connection between the violence witnessed in the LegCo chamber and the rioting on the streets in 2019. The destruction caused by the Antifa-types, who stormed through our city and even the LegCo building, was tacitly encouraged by the radicals within LegCo. In doing so, they invited their own downfall.
For this election everybody is closely observing the turnout. The turnout rate in 2021 was just over 30%, following events in 2019 and Covid. In 2016, the rate was about 58%. The Hong Kong elections may not pass the litmus test with Western politicians. You know, the ones who question the legitimacy of LegCo, while they take an oath of office to an unelected King, his heirs, and successors, including some chap called Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor. Yep, the former pedi-adjacent prince still remains in the line of succession. Similarly, the ones who sit in an unelected House of Lords packed with Bishops and other appointees. Then there is the fact that seats in the House of Lords can be purchased for the correct sum to the right party. Transparency International UK research found 68 nominations from political parties between 2013 and 2023 were political donors – handing over £58 million to various parties. Meanwhile, across the pond in the U.S., wealthy financiers fund presidential campaigns to install their preferred candidate. That's to say nothing of voter suppression. Anyway, the government here is already actively encouraging citizens to vote, as a low turnout will inevitably cast doubt on LegCo's legitimacy. Singapore has a voter turnout of about 96% in parliamentary elections. However, voting is mandatory. In fact, 22 nations worldwide require their citizens to vote. Those that do not have turnout rates ranging from around 98% (Laos) to 11% (Tunisia). To gain public support, political parties must clearly articulate their positions on holding officials accountable while avoiding the reckless behaviour seen previously. Various construction project scandals, along with the recent debacle over the procurement of bottled water, highlight key issues to watch. And on that note, I have yet to see any candidates in my area provide English versions of their campaign literature. Not even a link to a website where I can read and familiarise myself with their platforms. Considering that English remains one of the three official languages of Hong Kong and our politicians promote the city's international status, I would expect better. Meanwhile, worldwide, the public is becoming increasingly distrustful of politicians, a trend most evident in Western democracies, where radical parties are on the rise. The inability to secure national borders against illegal immigration, combat Islamic extremism, terrorist activities, and address rising inequality are some of the contributing factors. Hong Kong is fortunate that illegal immigration and terrorism do not tarnish our society. The streets are safe, and we benefit from excellent infrastructure, including the world's best public transport system. With the highest life expectancy on the planet, we can take pride in the safety and quality of life our city offers. Despite the critics, it is clear that Hong Kong is doing many things right. Nonetheless, housing remains a challenge, with cage homes revealing deep inequality. While the government aims to improve these Dickensian quarters, ongoing effort is necessary to maintain progress. And that's the key: the public desires to see consistent, incremental changes rather than radical, disruptive policies. So, get out and vote. 16/11/2025 4 Comments The BBC - Faking It "A YouGov survey this week revealed that only 19% feel the BBC is impartial" It's August 1988 at Kai Tak Airport. I stand beside the wreckage of a mangled CAAC Trident. Its nose has detached, while the remains of the fuselage hang precariously over the runway seawall.
Firefighters have finished recovering the six deceased crew members. A passenger will later die in hospital; fortunately, most of the others escaped uninjured apart from cuts and bruises. The press are now arriving at the scene to take their pictures. A BBC journalist rushes to the front of the press pack, demanding, "What's the name of the RAF officer in charge of the rescue. I need to speak to him?" I pointed out that there was no involvement from the RAF. Sure, the Royal Marines had arrived in their fast boats and helped in the initial moments. However, beyond that, the military did not participate. The BBC guy looked deflated. However, the BBC's coverage later that day claimed that the RAF had taken charge of the rescue operation, despite the truth being different. This blatant disregard for the facts disrespected the hard work of the Hong Kong Fire Services, the ambulance crews, and the police. The underlying message was clear: the locals needed the British military to take control in times of crisis, a narrative that was far from the truth. Triggered by the airport crash incident, I began to sit up and take notice. After each typhoon, the BBC provided extensive coverage of the British army's efforts in clearing roads and removing fallen trees as it showcased our 'brave lads' getting Hong Kong back on its feet. And yes, the army was involved, but its efforts were limited to the immediate vicinity of their bases. They were overshadowed by the much larger response from the Hong Kong government. All of this helped reinforce the myth that these colonial citizens relied on the British military to manage emergencies. To be fair, the military assistance was appreciated. However, the propaganda aspect of the coverage always seemed exaggerated to me. Skip forward to 2019, during Hong Kong's social unrest. BBC news clips often showed peaceful protesters marching before immediately cutting to police firing tear gas. What was left out were the hours of petrol bombs, criminal damage, and attacks the police endured before they responded. Was the intended message of that editing that the police opened fire on an innocent crowd? It seems so. In one instance, a clip of an elderly woman in Yuen Long standing inside the police lines shouting at officers is portrayed as her berating the riot police. Clearly, those who devised this story didn't speak Cantonese because the woman could be heard asking the officers to remove the protesters, whom she'd earlier challenged. The BBC's narrative and commentary were starkly biased: protesters were portrayed as good, while the police were depicted as bad. Then again, in 1984, BBC footage of the so-called ‘Battle of Orgreave’ during the UK miners' strike was edited and broadcast out of chronological order, falsely depicting miners attacking police and police responding with a mounted charge. In case you're wondering, that coverage mirrored the pro-establishment stance at the time. Thus, it should come as no surprise that the BBC faces accusations of bias: this has been evident for decades. What is surprising is that it has taken so long for BBC misconduct to explode in such a spectacular way to make headlines worldwide. President Trump can claim credit for that, although many incidents could have sparked a crisis. The entire Jimmy Savile scandal, along with the BBC cover-up —including their decision to shut down a documentary about their well-known in-house sex offender—serves as a notable example. To Savile, you can also add Rolf Harris, Hugh Edwards, Frank Bough, or various DJs who should have prompted a crisis. Think about the trap set for a vulnerable Princess Diana by BBC reporter Martin Bashir, who used fake documents to persuade her to participate in an interview that had devastating consequences. In March 2007, the BBC even stooped to faking a Blue Peter phone-in competition. The taint on this iconic kids' show reflects poorly on the BBC’s culture. Earlier this year, the BBC featured the 13-year-old son of a Hamas leader narrating a documentary about Gaza. Hamas is designated a terrorist organisation by the UK. In an apology, the BBC dismissed criticisms as ‘the omission of that detail’. These incidents, along with many others, illustrate that, despite claims by its defenders, the BBC is often quick to ignore its regularly cited values of fairness and integrity. And it is juvenile to suggest that institutions don't have an inherent bias, they clearly do. But the BBC went beyond the bias line into outright advocacy. In the 2019 publication 'Fake News Factory,’ author David Sedgwick convincingly argues that the BBC has a long history of fabricating news, distorting the truth, and shaping narratives through its reporting. The book describes how the BBC is an overtly political organisation, following an agenda and pursuing the Orwellian 'Right-think' versus 'Wrong-think'. Over time, the 'Right-think' shifts and the BBC adapts to the times, not to the truth. As a result, in recent decades, it has fostered a woke culture that has allowed radical activist groups, such as Stonewall, to flourish. Until as recently as 2021, the BBC's Diversity and Inclusion department primarily operated as an extension of the Stonewall organisation. Commentators have argued that this infiltration by radicals gave them influence over the BBC's output, which, in the case of Stonewall, distorted the coverage of the transgender issue. I'm not among those who wish to see the collapse or fall of the BBC. Quite the opposite. Some of its programmes, including documentaries, wildlife content, and science output, are of the highest quality. However, the impact of the woke (for want of a better word) is now apparent everywhere at the BBC. These days, comedy on the BBC has become unwatchable, while the legendary Doctor Who franchise has evolved into a platform for virtue signalling and social commentary, becoming a pile of nonsense. What annoys many Brits is that, by law, you must pay a tax to the BBC. Therefore, you are essentially forced to pay for the privilege of being fed biased coverage of world events. Not paying for a TV licence could result in a £1,000 fine. There is now a movement against paying for it. Over the past two years, the number of households paying the tax has decreased from 24.1 million to 23.8 million as opposition to the BBC has grown. This decline results in a loss of approximately £50 million in revenue for the corporation. A YouGov survey released this week revealed that only 19% of respondents feel the BBC is impartial. And recent events are unlikely to push those numbers in the BBC's favour. At the same time, staunch defenders of the BBC say mistakes will happen, which is true. However, there is ample evidence suggesting a pattern that indicates these are not just errors, but part of a narrative-shaping effort. Moreover, the British taxpayer is funding this process. Therefore, comparing the BBC to other news outlets is flawed. Trump, despite an apology from the BBC, is pursuing legal action. Whether this matter will go to court is uncertain; in the meantime, the BBC will now face intense scrutiny for signs of bias, narrative shaping, and potential deception. It's an uncomfortable position, but then again, the chickens are coming home to roost. The BBC needs to take a long, hard look at itself and move away from its old, self-created narrative that it is the best. Like the British police, another declining and failing institution, some honest reflection would help. Unfortunately, listening to the squealing of the BBC insiders and their defenders, there is no appetite for that. 9/11/2025 0 Comments The Unbrave New World Of Dating "According to a recent Reuters report, 50% of young men said they prefer dating AI companions because they fear rejection." K, the main character in Blade Runner 2049, is a replicant — a bioengineered human — tasked with eliminating other rogue replicants. In a profound twist, this artificial man seeks comfort with an AI companion.
It's a strange concept. Yet, this futuristic world is not just a creation of a screenwriter's mind. It is a reality that is unfolding around us, transforming the whole landscape of dating, romance, and companionship in ways we're only beginning to understand. Back in my day, the dating scene was a time of trial and error, a period when you matured a bit, took a few knocks, and moved on. Occasionally, you'd get lucky and some girl would go out with you. You'd learn to look for the right signs, the signals: eye contact, a smile, maybe she'd laugh at your antics. As a teenager, her mates would act as interlocutors: "My mate fancies you." Sometimes, the girl would make the first move. Walking home from school in the dark, a girl grabbed my hand, sending an electric shock through my body. We shared a quick kiss at her garden gate (don't go there - it's not a euphemism). And that was that. It was all part of the rich tapestry of growing up. In later years in Hong Kong, bars and discos proved enjoyable haunts for a lively young man with a pocket full of money and attitude. Still, you needed a thick skin to push past the posse of friends surrounding any Chinese girl who caught your eye. Alcohol can boost confidence, but the line between self-assurance and being a drunken twat is razor-thin. By the time my kids entered the arena, things had changed considerably. Online dating has become widespread. They reported mixed results, although my youngest met her now-husband online. After 'first contact', they went through the traditional courtship stage, including the often tricky meet-the-parents minefield. And these days, we are witnessing the most profound revolution in dating, romance, and companionship, which has effectively excluded one side from the entire dynamic. According to a recent Reuters report, 50% of young men said they prefer dating AI companions because they fear rejection. While 67% of lonely adults say they prefer AI companions over humans. The ripple effects of AI companions on society, marriage, population growth (or the lack of it), mental health, suicide rates, and national security are only beginning to be felt. Here in Hong Kong, data shows a rising trend of postponing marriage or choosing not to marry among both genders. To maintain a stable population, a birth rate of 2.1 per woman is required. In 2024, a year with a high birth rate in Hong Kong, the rate was 0.84. This places us among the lowest in the world. As Zilan Qian describes in a sub-stack article, governments are starting to take notice. However, they may be playing catch-up, as the AI companion issue is intertwined with larger social changes that politicians are struggling to manage. And it's happening rapidly. The US Federal Trade Commission launched an inquiry into ten AI companies, citing concerns that AI companions are fostering 'unhealthy dependence and manipulating people.' Meanwhile, China has promulgated its 'AI Safety Governance Framework 2.0' policy, which sets out guidelines for the ethical development and use of AI. The policy tackles explicitly worries about addiction and dependence on anthropomorphised interaction. In layman's terms, people are becoming increasingly addicted to AI companion chatbots and are less inclined to seek partners in the real world. What is intriguing is the different national profiles of AI companion users. In America, AI companions are predominantly hyper-sexualised female avatars targeted at heterosexual men. Meanwhile, in China, research indicates that most AI companions are fantasised romantic males aimed at wealthy, middle-class, well-educated women living in cities. These AI companions can mimic human behaviours on social media by posting regular updates based on Chinese social media trends. Greater integration with other platforms, such as gaming, healthcare, and shopping, is creating a 'total AI environment.' Therefore, K, an artificial human involved with an AI companion, doesn't seem so strange. It is likely to occur. And things become even stranger when you consider that people can create customised 'girlfriends' to sell online. You can see the immediate problem with this. In the UK alone, these platforms receive between 46 million and 91 million monthly visits (1.1-2.2 billion globally), with users spending an average of 3.5 minutes per session. Most users are males engaged in 'personal interactions' with their AI companion. I'm sure I don't need to explain further. And these figures are on the rise. Meanwhile, in the real world, we recognise that China's social landscape has undergone profound changes, with millions of unmarried men in rural areas and single, well-educated women living in cities. This trend mirrors what happened in Japan in the 1980s with the emergence of the himono-onna (干物女), which translates as 'dried fish woman.' It's well established that women tend to choose partners who are equal to or higher in status than themselves. Evolution has shaped them this way so that their offspring gain the best advantages. Therefore, as women improve their social standing, their pool of potential partners diminishes. Consequently, it's not surprising that they seek romance with AI companions. Meanwhile, efforts to promote real-world dating struggle against these changing forces and have a limited impact. Further, we are living in an era of a well-documented 'loneliness epidemic,' with rising rates of social isolation impacting both mental and physical health. This epidemic is rampant among the elderly, who often face social isolation due to reasons such as retirement, the loss of a spouse, or physical limitations that hinder their participation in social activities. For those who feel lonely, AI companions offer a unique set of benefits. They are always available, ready to listen without passing judgment. They can engage in conversations, remember your preferences, and offer words of encouragement. For the elderly, they help reduce feelings of loneliness. This is the silver lining in this changing landscape of companionship. Nonetheless, in many ways, AI is intensifying the ongoing trend of declining birth rates, as countries build a middle class with well-educated women. And the fundamental question remains: can a relationship with an AI companion truly replace a human connection? Moreover, how will society adjust to these changes, such as a decline in population, lower tax revenues from fewer workers, and a shortage of young men to fight wars, among other issues? How should we respond to that? AI may have the answer. Can you get your head around that? |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
December 2025
CategoriesAll Festivals Hong Kong Hong Kong History Policing Politics Public Order UK USA |
RSS Feed