当新闻成为⻛险⸺以黎智英案为镜鉴的个⼈与时代观察

作者：Cooper Guan

编辑：黄吉洲 校对：熊辩 翻译：彭小梅

⼀､ ⼀个曾在体制媒体⼯作的⼈的观察

我曾在中国体制内党群⼝从事宣传⼯作，同时为多家体制媒体撰稿与通讯｡ 在那个阶段，我接受的职业训练强调舆论导向､ 宣传纪律与信息控制｡

后来，我创办⽂化传播机构，专注创意视频制作，并逐渐转向以真实表达与创作⾃由为核⼼的职业路径｡

新闻与创作让我相信：真实是职业的基础，表达是社会进步的动⼒。

然⽽，中共治下的中国现实的政治环境，使这⼀信念不断受到冲击｡

黎智英案，使我不得不重新思考⼀个问题：当新闻被视为威胁时，媒体⼈还如何存在？

⼆､ 从制度内部到表达受限，个⼈经历与公共现象

在中国⽣活期间，我通过⽹络逐渐接触到更多历史､ 政治､ 时事信息｡出于对公共事务的关注，我曾在社交平台纪念＂六·四＂等历史事件，分享公共议题观点，呼吁法治､ ⾃由与⼈权。结果，不仅内容被删除，账号被限制，最终在⼀次全国性的⽹络整治⾏动中被永久封禁。这些经历让我意识到，表达本身可能已成为⻛险｡ 这种现象并⾮个案，⽽是信息治理体系的⼀部分｡

三､ 黎智英案 新闻活动如何被重新定义

黎智英案的核⼼问题，并不仅仅是某些具体⾏为是否合法，⽽是新闻评论是否被视为政治威胁，国际交流是否被解释为安全⻛险，媒体⻆⾊是否被重新定义。

在现代法治社会，新闻通常被视为监督机制，⽽在⾼度控制的政治结构中，新闻可能被视为潜在⻛险源｡ 这种转变，不仅影响个别记者，也改变整个媒体⽣态｡

四､ 从国内经历到海外媒体参与，表达空间的对⽐

来到海外后，我开始参与华⼈⺠主媒体的采访与志愿⼯作｡ 我第⼀次感受到可以公开提问、可以讨论敏感议题，可以表达不同观点｡

这种对⽐使我更加清楚地认识到，⾃由表达并不是抽象⼝号，⽽是每天可以实践的现实｡

同时，我也意识到，海外华⼈社区中仍存在⾃我审查与沉默⽂化｡ 不愿公开表达政治观点，在社交媒体避免讨论敏感议题，对媒体采访保持警惕｡ 这不仅是个⼈选择，更是⻓期制度环境塑造的⼼理结构与⻓期的信息控制环境和中共⼴泛的海外⻓臂监控密切相关｡

当新闻活动被刑事化，所产⽣的寒蝉效应不仅局限在某个地区，它将通过社群⽹络扩散到全球华⼈社会｡

五､ 新闻⾃由的意义，不仅属于记者

没有独⽴媒体的社会，往往出现信息来源单⼀、谣⾔传播加剧、公共监督缺失等常见现象。因为新闻⾃由并不是媒体⼈的特权，⽽是公众获取真实信息的保障｡ 黎智英案之所以引发国际关注，正是因为它触及现代社会如何平衡权⼒与表达｡

六､ 个⼈⽴场声明

基于个⼈经历与⻓期观察 我逐渐形成明确⽴场：

第一，坚决⽀持新闻⾃由与⾔论⾃由；第二、坚定⽀持法治与⼈权原则；第三，强烈反对以模糊安全概念限制表达。这些⽴场源于我个人曾经在体制内的媒体相关⼯作经验，也来自我自身多年创作⾏业经历，尤其是遭受被封号与表达受限，⾔论审查和警察调查，甚至让⼈恐惧⼈身安全的亲身经历，以及当前参与海外⺠主媒体的实践，我的写作与采访，记录和表达正是这种⽴场的延续｡

七､ 记录仍然是抵抗遗忘的⽅式

黎智英案提醒我，历史不会因为沉默⽽停⽌，真实也不会因为恐惧⽽消失｡

对我⽽⾔，继续写作与采访，不只是职业选择，更是对真实与⾃由的坚持｡

在任何社会中，允许不同声⾳存在，才是真正稳定与成熟的标志｡

From State Propaganda to Overseas Democratic Media

When Journalism Becomes a Risk — Personal and Historical Reflections Inspired by the Jimmy Lai Case

Author: Cooper GuanEditor: Huang Jizhou Proofreader: Xiong Bian Translator: Peng Xiaomei

Abstract:From working in China’s propaganda system to practicing journalism in overseas democratic media, the author reflects on the risks surrounding press freedom and freedom of expression through the lens of the Jimmy Lai case, emphasizing the importance of rule of law and truth.

I. Observations from Someone Who Once Worked in the State Media System

I once worked in the propaganda system within China’s party-affiliated institutions, while also writing and reporting for several state-controlled media outlets. During that period, my professional training emphasized guidance of public opinion, propaganda discipline, and information control.

Later, I founded a cultural communications agency focused on creative video production and gradually shifted toward a professional path centered on truthful expression and creative freedom.

Journalism and creative work led me to believe that truth is the foundation of the profession, and expression is the driving force of social progress.however, the political reality in China under Communist Party rule has repeatedly challenged this belief. The Jimmy Lai case forced me to reconsider a difficult question: When journalism itself is treated as a threat, how can journalists continue to exist?

II. From Within the System to Restricted Expression: Personal Experience and a Broader Public Phenomenon

While living in China, I gradually gained access through the internet to more historical, political, and current affairs information.Out of concern for public affairs, I once commemorated historical events such as June Fourth on social media, shared views on public issues, and called for rule of law, freedom, and human rights. The result was that not only were my posts deleted, but my account was restricted and eventually permanently banned during a nationwide internet “rectification campaign.” These experiences made me realize that expression itself can become a risk. This phenomenon is not an isolated case; it is part of a broader system of information governance.

The Jimmy Lai Case: How Journalism Is Being Redefined

The core issue of the Jimmy Lai case is not merely whether certain actions are legal. Rather, it raises deeper questions: Can journalistic commentary be interpreted as a political threat?Can international communication be redefined as a national security risk?Is the role of the media itself being fundamentally redefined?

In modern societies governed by the rule of law, journalism is typically regarded as a mechanism of oversight.But within highly controlled political structures, journalism may instead be treated as a potential source of danger. This transformation affects not only individual journalists but also reshapes the entire media ecosystem.

IV. From Domestic Experience to Overseas Media Participation: A Contrast in Freedom of Expression

After coming overseas, I began participating in interviews and volunteer work with Chinese-language democratic media outlets. For the first time, I experienced the ability to ask questions openly, discuss sensitive topics, and express differing viewpoints. This contrast made me realize more clearly that freedom of expression is not an abstract slogan—it is a reality that can be practiced daily.

At the same time, I also noticed that within overseas Chinese communities there still exists a culture of self-censorship and silence.Many people avoid openly expressing political opinions, refrain from discussing sensitive issues on social media, and remain cautious toward media interviews.This is not merely a personal choice. It is a psychological structure shaped by long-term institutional environments, deeply connected to decades of information control and the Chinese Communist Party’s extensive long-arm surveillance overseas.

When journalistic activity becomes criminalized, the resulting chilling effect does not remain confined to a single region; it spreads through social networks to Chinese communities around the world.

The Meaning of Press Freedom Belongs Not Only to Journalists

In societies without independent media, several familiar problems often emerge:limited sources of information,the spread of rumors,the absence of public oversight.Press freedom is not a privilege for journalists. It is a guarantee for the public to obtain truthful information.The Jimmy Lai case has drawn international attention precisely because it touches upon a fundamental question of modern societies:How should power be balanced with freedom of expression?

VI. A Personal Statement of Position

Based on my personal experiences and long-term observations, I have gradually formed a clear position:

First, I firmly support freedom of the press and freedom of speech.Second, I firmly support the principles of rule of law and human rights.Third, I strongly oppose the use of vague security concepts to restrict expression.

These positions come from my earlier experience working within China’s state media system. They also arise from my years working in creative industries, particularly from my own experiences of account bans, restricted expression, censorship, police questioning, and even fear for personal safety. Today, through my participation in overseas democratic media, my writing and interviews are a continuation of this position.

VII. Recording Is Still a Way to Resist Forgetting

The Jimmy Lai case reminds me that history will not stop because of silence, and truth will not disappear because of fear.

For me, continuing to write and conduct interviews is not only a professional choice—it is also a commitment to truth and freedom.

In any society, allowing different voices to exist is the true sign of stability and maturity.