Hong Kong tries and fails to hire PR firms to rebuild image | Hacker News Reader

Hong Kong tries and fails to hire PR firms to rebuild image

bbc.com

197 pointsbaylearn147 comments

Always found it weird to see governments paying for PR consultants.

It's like : I give you tax money to do a good job, but you spend it to convince me that you're doing a good job instead of actually delivering getting shit done.

Agreed but it looks like this instance is about convincing foreign people.

To be fair, there is quite a lot of money being spent to convince you that they are doing a bad job, so it is reasonable to fight that.

Any sources on this? I don't get the impression that the protestors are well-funded.

I'm not speaking about China specifically. The parent said:

> Always found it weird to see governments paying for PR consultants.

And that is what I'm responding to.

Some of the protest leaders have been bankrolled by NGOs with connections to the US government since the 'Umbrella Revolution'.

There's quite a few crowd funding campaigns by protestors that have raised millions of dollars. They were able to buy full page ads in major international newspapers.

Hire PR professionals to stave off these other PR professionals. This industry operates like a protection racket.

see also: advertising

And law. And fashion.

Do you also think a good product doesn’t need marketing? And a good engineer doesn’t need to sell their accomplishments in performance reviews?

You shouldn't need marketing when the "customer" has no other option but to deal with you. If you legitimately don't suck then the customer will figure it out through their experience (because they have to deal with you). Hiring PR firms to gaslight the public is not something a decent government does.

Some customers can choose, I recently decided not to fly to HK.

That sounds like you’re saying you are not a customer. What exactly is your point?

I mean if you where a visited in the past with first hand knowledge that decided not to come back, then PR is not going to have an impact.

Parent is saying they are a customer shopping for holiday/business destinations and they decided to to do business with HK. In other words, HK just lost a sale.

Customer is one who purchases something as in that’s what it means. So they can’t be a HK customer if they don’t make a purchase.

Potential customer’s is generally referred to a Lead specifically to make this distinction.

This is just pure pedantry, because your whole argument would become null if the parent said "potential customer" instead of "customer".

I would consider it null already, given that the parent described their situation very explicitly, and it is clear as day that the situation implied "potential" in "customer".

As written it’s an ambiguous statement. You’re assuming they used customer incorrectly.

Though, if they said potential customer that would not be a rebuttal of dsfyu404ed.

> If you legitimately don't suck then the customer will figure it out through their experience (because they have to deal with you).

This isn't true. Most people in the US, for instance, never have to deal with the justice system. They have no idea whether it sucks or not, and their opinions are largely shaped by both positive and negative PR.

I'm a potential HK customer (it always seemed like an interesting place to visit). My employer is a potential HK customer (HK could be a location for an office). We have many other options than HK.

> According to the brief, published in the PR industry paper The Holmes Report, the government wanted a firm to "address negative perceptions in key markets overseas to maintain confidence in Hong Kong"

Some amount of PR is IMHO also appropriate internally to inform people about things that are happening/available if they aren't otherwise well-known.

In the past 3 months, Hong Kong has successfully demonstrated that marketing wont save a bad product.

For tourism and appeal for businesses it can have a clear ROI; both of those are important for Hong Kong.

I was planning to visit Hong Kong before this began but won't now for the foreseeable future due to the actions of the governments of HK and China. I want to visit China too but the rapid development of their omnipresent surveillance state has me putting those plans off presumably forever, which is a shame as I am fascinated by Chinese history and culture.

I would say it still worth a visit to see it first hand. Protest and civil disobedience normally occurred during the weekend. r/HongHong even has a link to a Google Calendar on all the events that are going to happen.

You should visit China just to see the scale. 20 cities larger then NYC. Just one example, Tokyo's bullet train station has 4 tracks Shanghai's has 24. Also make sure to visit the country side and see how many people need to be helped out of poverty.

Thanks for your suggestions. I have to admit I enjoy nature over man-made achievements but I would appreciate visiting China's mills of industry in addition to absorbing the local culture and cuisines throughout the nation (food is perhaps most accessible and direct experience of local culture?)

I'm currently in Hong Kong (planning to leave in December). Honestly if you want to come as a tourist I can't see you'll face any problems. Just be sensible and you'll be safe.

Unless you don't want to fund the economy of Hong Kong through tourism because you disagree with politics of its government and China. In which case, fair enough, really. I'm avoiding pro-China companies as much as possible myself. Although obviously the necessities of living do get a little in the way of that.

The chinese government showed restraint and maturity in acts (if not in grandstanding) and the HK gov is slowly shifting to serving its people rather than ask them to serve it.

The protesters are now a minority and extreme to the point any win ends up "not enough", I for one am seeing it as a milestone for China's shift toward democracy.

Visit or don't, but HK has a unique history, from its troubled beginning as a british colony to its difficult chinese integration. We prefer to slowly build it compromise by compromise rather than shun any sign of progress in the name of absolutism.

China's shift toward democracy, what do you mean here? Any recent examples of China becoming more democratic?

Or is we didn't slaughter or own people for speaking their mind this time what you mean?

> Visit or don't, but HK has a unique history, from its troubled beginning as a british colony to its difficult chinese integration. We prefer to slowly build it compromise by compromise rather than shun any sign of progress in the name of absolutism.

This statement makes me really curious to understand your point of view: From your perspective, is this what HK people in general (not just the protesters) want? When you say progress, progress for whom, and toward what end? What is the goal of integrating HK into China, or what is the expected benefit for the Chinese people and for Hong Kong people? I am not from China or HK, so I don't really have a great understanding of what people in either place think.

It's definitely not just PR Consultants...the gov't hires management consulting firms like McKinsey, Accenture, etc. all the time.

"The people must learn how well I govern them. How would they know if I did not tell them?" -Dune, by Frank Herbert

Added to https://github.com/globalcitizen/taoup

This looks like a neat program. (As someone who has never used ruby): how do I run it? This isn't obvious to me.

Since it declares the interpreter at the beginning (https://github.com/globalcitizen/taoup/blob/master/taoup#L1), you should just be able to chmod +x it and run it as ./taoup

Since it's an executable like that, this would also allow you to put it in /usr/local/bin (or wherever you keep bins) and call it from anywhere in your shell with 'taoup'

(my technical wording may be off)

I don't remember that quote at all, who said it in the book?

Leto is talking to Paul, and he is talking about either a region or a chemical process that is important for the production of film stock. then he sardonically says something like, (paraphrasing):

"Film stock is very important. we have the finest propaganda offices. The people must learn how well I govern them. How would they know if we didn't tell them?"

he means it sarcastically, but propaganda is important to keep useful people on the planet and to win the general populace over. Leto knows he's backed into a corner on Arrakis and he's focusing on what he can.

I also could only find the part i posted originally online, its not one of the more frequent quotes from the book.

Same things go for companies that fight their employees.

There wouldn't be any fighting if companies would stop acting against their employees best interests.

> the government wanted a firm to "address negative perceptions in key markets overseas to maintain confidence in Hong Kong"

It seems like the point of this particular exercise wasn't to convince citizens of anything, but rather to convince people that want to do business in HK that it is still a good idea. This definitely seems premature to the point of being stupid and massively tone-deaf, but does not seem especially ill-intentioned.

Sometime people do need to spend money on PR to announce the fact that they can do a good job, because doing a good job is not always self evident.

But you're right in that it feels slimey when governments hire out PR to dress up problems instead of solving problems.

The’re PRopaganda consultants.

> I give you tax money to do a good job

In a democracy, sure.

In a dictatorship, you give them tax money because they said so, and they’ll do whatever the hell they want with it, because they aren’t accountable to you in any way.

Also to pay for retirement, roads and safety. Dictatorships have many shapes, they're not all corrupt to the core so much they tax-enslave their people.

Singapore and HK, for example, have very low taxes.

Sure, but GP was making a statement about the “purpose” of their tax money. Without accountability, the purpose is whatever the government wants, not what citizens want. That might be roads, but it could well be PR firms.

Well, I can understand the need to publicize stuff that might not go unnoticed. But I definitely scratched my head at how the US postal service was doing major, ostentatious sponsorships of cyclists on the Tour de France, and was like, "uh, are people really not aware that the Post Office is a thing?"

Edit: Side note, I remember a slashdot thread from a while back that mentioned the "Word of Mouth Marketing Association", and someone was like, "um, what? Isn't the whole point of word-of-mouth marketing that it's not organized by some committee, top-down?"

Well there is the brand marketing aspect and I suspect that US post also has European business to promote.

Isn't it also for tourism and external investment? Image is important.

Often policies don't matter as much as how you promote it. China and Singapore are two places that promote their policies in a way that makes people at home patriotic and many people overseas jealous.

There was an article here on HN about Singapore a few days ago and I was relieved to see that not everyone in the comments is buying it.

Basically it's politics and where there's politics there's going to be a need for PR.

Usually, a government's diplomatic arm (e.g. US Department of State) serves as their "international PR" function. So yes, governments do "pay" for PR, it's just done by their own employees most of the time.

Hong Kong is a special case as they're not a separate country, so China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs handles all their diplomacy for them (for better and for worse).

It has come full circle; the PR industry was created to apply the principles of government propaganda in corporations, but propaganda isn't cool anymore, so they have to hire the PR firms.

Saudi Arabia also makes use of PR firms to improve their image.

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/spoof-ad-campaign-mocks-s...

https://www.politico.eu/article/saudi-arabia-the-pr-client-n...

Can a PR company manage to fix Saudi Arabia's image after the Jamal Khashoggi murder? But, hey, why not take the money

Technically you only need to repair their image with the powerful. I don't think there are any single-issue Saudi Arabia voters out there.

We're already seeing the effects of this. I saw on the news recently where someone described the recent Saudi Oil attacks as "Saudi Arabia's 9/11" -- an ironic statement, given the fact that more Saudi nationals died hijacking the planes on 9/11 (15 of the 19) than in this attack (0)

Most people should be concerned about the environmental and economic impact of the attacks.

This type of thinking should be applied at all times not only when it affects our bottom line. How about the attacks and massacres that SA is doing to the Yemenis? How about US attacking Iraq? Etc.. Yes we should always be concerned!

Iran backs a proxy terrorist group in Yemen. Iran sparked the Iran-Iraq War.

And funding 9/11 terrorists...

And their ongoing invasion of Yemen...

And their atrocious stances on human rights...

I’ve seen MDB (Mohammad Bin Salman Al Saud) publishing startup themed posts in LinkedIn. They are certainly trying to look hip again.

Isn’t the common acronym for him MBS?

Thank you you’re right, now I know why Googling for his full name was so difficult.

I guess PR firms understand enough about PR to know taking this job would be awful PR for themselves.

Bingo... They certainly how to know how to spin their reason

This is an example of attempting to treat the symptom not the disease. Rather than fix the underlying socio-economic issues such as income inequality, lack of affordable housing, and the lack of social mobility and opportunities- the instinct is to hire PR to pretend it is better.

To be fair, that's what happens on the mainland where they don't need PR companies, they just censor everything everything that doesn't enthusiastically support their view.

I am sure some people protesting are advocating for socio-economic fixes but mostly the protests seem to be concerned more with "I'd rather not be kidnapped in the middle of the night and sent to a labour camp."

The protests are more about indiscriminate police violence and demanding the right to vote.

It actually started as opposition to an extradition bill that has since been shelved for now (for obvious reasons) and then transitioned to a call for full blown democracy and accountability of the police forces - who are now under the control of the Chinese government.

I think (rightly so) they are more afraid of the Chinese government coming in and strong arming their population like they do to their own population. The treatment of dissidents and the possibility of having to deal with the Chinese government in any fashion is something that makes the entire population nervous.

> “It would perhaps not be the most cost-effective way to use the government resources to launch any campaign to rebuild Hong Kong's reputation”

Step 1: Don't associate yourself with a country that brutally oppresses basic humans rights.

(not saying my country is an angel)

> (not saying my country is an angel)

Then we both know how difficult it can be :(

Based on slicing social opinion polls by age though, one could say that progress advances one funeral at a time.

Or one could say that oppression advances by one funeral at a time. It is not like there haven't been examples of societies changing towards more totalitarian and oppressive over time.

I find it shocking how common this line of tough is now. Maybe the world dreamed about by people who actively celebrate the deaths of those who don't agree with them, is not such an utopia as we like to believe.

Sure. People have different opinions of things, to some extent social change is zero-sum. I've just given my opinions.

Hong Kong gov pisses their own citizen off:

Cross - Say "Sorry, we will not do it again and we will fix our wrong doings";

️Check - Hire PR firm spreading bad propaganda to "address negative perceptions in key markets overseas to maintain confidence in Hong Kong"

Why???? It's the best time to show that Hong Kong is a democratic & lawful place by resolve the issue peacefully and make their people happy. It's a opportunity for the government if they play this right, don't blow it up!

What will happen as the end of the “transition” nears? Few in HK I assume will accept that the HK system is replaced with Chinese eceonomics and politics. By the time this question arises, everything indicates China will already be an Orwellian dystopia. HK doesn’t have natural resources. Its citizens and businesses can leave. So what China really stand to gain from its claims on HK?

China wants to assert its national sovereignty over HK. By controlling Hong Kong the communist government gains legitimacy in the eyes of the Chinese people. There's quite nothing that binds together a people than a city of young people that doesn't want to be Chinese.

Where would HK citizens go sadly the UK threw them under a bus years ago.

Like calling the renovators when the house is still burning.

Is it weird that we know about this because the leader of Hong Kong announced it in a press conference? Surely it can only make them look worse in the international eye. Is this a subtle act of rebellion, or is she that clueless? Or is it expected to play better with the mainland, somehow?

Maybe she didn't have anyone competent to advise her this would make Hong Kong look bad?

It was leaked first from when she had a closed session with some business leaders.

Fails?

Changing people image about a country can take years

If they measure success by only few months, they wont see any change

Perhaps one way to read it is that none of the PR firms that HK approached wanted them as a client in the current situation.

That's pretty interesting if it were the case.

That is exactly the case.

I think you might've misunderstood. Hong Kong failed to hire any PR firms; they approached a number of firms, and they all declined (actually, two simply didn't respond at all).

Rebuild the image from what to what?

They need to pick up this turd by the clean end...

is it known what those firms were?

HK is definitely a spring board to democratizing China.

China can follow a model like Taiwan (ROC) and be very happy. People in Taiwan have democracy, social services, and feel great pride in their country.

China has choices it can make, it's the people's choice. If it really wants to be great, it will entrust the power in its people by giving them human rights like EU and liberties like USA. It will respect intellectual property laws and have an open internet. It will pay reparations to the people of Xinjiang and Tibet and give them their sovereignty.

Hong Kong is proof the system works, but the system can't work when they let property flippers from the mainland drive up real estate prices. The people of HK are suffering greatly because of the greedy few.

The jist of the HK situation is this: China is trying to subvert the democracy in HK by taking the voting slots so they're all bought out to Beijing. But HK is an international city.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com