#THREAD: As a Hong Kong freelance journalist, I’d like to say something other in-house journalists may not dare say due to their code of conduct. Forgive me for being sentimental tonight. But it is important, as today, Sept 23, marks the darkest day for Hong Kong’s #PressFreedom.

Today is the first day when the new definition of media representative is applied to the police protocol. The new definition disavows credentials from the city’s most acclaimed journalists’ unions the HK Journalists Asso. and the HK Press Photographers Asso.

The police would only acknowledge media which had registered under the Government News and Media Information System and “internationally recognised and reputable” foreign media organisations in the name of “facilitating frontline duties of police officers”.

One might be quickly reminded of the licensing regime for journalists, which pro-Beijing politicians, activists and police officers’ associations have been calling on since the mass anti-govt protests erupted last year in order to regulate the journalism industry.

Hong Kong Chief Executive, Carrie Lam, rejected the idea in October last year, saying the govt had no intention to put forward a licensing mechanism. But instead, it put forward today something that is much worse than the licensing scheme.

The new arrangement has drastically narrowed the definition of journalists and gives frontline police officers the authority to approve and, in other words, handpick journalists in a protest scene. It greatly undermines Hong Kong’s press freedom and journalists’ right to report.

Security chief John Lee defended the police, saying that many places where press freedom is praised, like New York and Los Angeles, also have a journalist certification system which authorities issue press cards to journalists. But the inconvenient truth is: they are democracies.

But unfortunately, Hong Kong doesn’t have full democracy, or instead, a declining democracy which almost all sorts of freedoms are under threat. Rules applicable to NYC and LA does not apply to Hong Kong. What is worse, it is another blatant curtailment of freedom of the press.

Let’s not forget which media outlet captured the scene when an officer shot a 21yo in his abdomen in Sai Wan Ho in Nov last year. It was @CUPIDNEWS1, an online news outlet not included on the govt registry. Without the footage, people’s right to know would have been compromised.

Let’s not forget the scene when several officers chased down and subdued a 12yo girl in Mong Kok earlier this month. The footage was shot by a student journalist from HKUST. All these indicate that even one reporter less, the authorities would dominate the truth.

The existence of journalists is a constant reminder of the existence of injustice. The only way in which the authorities can get rid of journalists in society: to listen to the society and to make it freer and more democratic.

Mrs Lam, if you are a true believer of laissez-faire, then the city’s journalism industry should not be regulated by the authorities, but by the market. What you think a plethora of journalists aptly reflects the shortcoming of trust in official sources.

International news agency @Reuters has modified its narrative about Hong Kong, shifting from “a semi-autonomous city” to “a once-autonomous city”. I hope, Mrs Lam, you could think twice before turning it to “another Chinese city”.

I hope, as a freelance journalist, I’d make use of the traction I’ve gleaned on Twitter, which I doubt I have, to speak for my fellows. Unfortunately, the locus towards the demise of the city’s press freedom is only likely to be reinforced. My only thing left to say is stay safe.