More Thoughts on the Free TV License Issue…..

Looks like this whole free TV license thing has created a huge backlash both amongst the general public as well as within the entertainment industry. 

Below are a few articles that came out the last couple days that look at the issue from various angles – all are pretty good reads that help provide more insight into the situation (and help explain why so many people are upset over the government’s decision).  I especially recommend reading article #3....

One thing that I do want to say about the laying off of HKTV’s employees….I’m still pissed that it had to happen and I still feel sorry for the artists who are out of a job now and must find another means of making a living.  But I guess if we try to look at it from a more positive angle, it’s not necessarily a bad thing in a sense…another way to look at it is that HKTV is letting the 320 people go so that they can pursue opportunities elsewhere and not be tied down to a company that won’t be able to do much for them now without a license.   Yes, Ricky Wong could probably pursue other outlets if he wanted to, but whichever option he takes, it will probably still be a long, tedious process, so there’s no point in dragging everyone along for the ride at this point.  It’s better to just release them all now, then later on if Ricky happens to be successful in whatever venture he ends up doing, he can always hire them all back at that time.

The interesting thing is that so far, I have yet to read a single negative comment from HKTV people about Ricky Wong or his company.  Even the people who are being laid off are standing behind Ricky and have nothing but good things to say about the company and his leadership.  Of course, I know there will be commenters out there who will say that all those people have been ‘brainwashed’ by HKTV, which is fine, as people can think what they want.    But as far as I’m concerned, for people who are being laid off by a company and who will no longer have any ties to the company whatsoever to still sing the company’s praises and loudly voice that they have absolutely no regrets of being a part of that company, it shows that the company must be doing SOMETHING right.  The unity and passion (for their craft) that I’ve witnessed amongst the HKTV artists and behind the scenes crew the last couple months have been very refreshing – it’s something I hadn’t seen in the HK entertainment industry in a very long time ….too bad we won’t be able to see more of it now (thanks to the HK government)…..

*****

Article 1:

Source:  The Standard

Rally backers looking for trouble

Winnie Chong
Thursday, October 17, 2013

Some people posting on a Facebook page calling for a protest rally at government headquarters on the free- TV license row - which by last night had 390,000 "likes" - want action on Friday, not Sunday.

Sunday is a day off, one noted, so better Friday as "the government only cares if there is a threat."

While most posters supported HKTV, the failed license applicant, TVB artist Ronald Law Kwan-moon was among the exceptions.

He said owner Ricky Wong should stop blaming the government and citing a lack of "public justice" for his failure.

But this led to people leaving messages on Law's Facebook page.

"Hope you can think clearly and withdraw your message," one commented.

And at an HKTV staff meeting yesterday, So Man-chung, the main producer of drama The Borderline, wore black.

It was a pity viewers may never get to see dramas HKTV hoped to produce, said the former TVB director, who claimed politics was behind the licensing decision.

"I thought HKTV could become Hong Kong's Pixar," So added. "But now there's no such chance."

And So said he did not regret joining HKTV. "Our boss has given us lots of space and freedom for creation, which is not given at TVB."

An IT staffer named Chung said he was shocked that HKTV was laying off so many people.

A staffer named Wong said he had told HKTV that if it needs to lay off people "it should sack someone like me, a younger person, in the first batch. We do not mind advancing and retreating with the company."

Beyond the industry, Civic Party lawmaker Ronny Tong Ka-wah said the license decision "projected a feeling that the government is protecting an operator who monopolizes the market.

"The decision completely violated the competition ordinance."

And Charles Peter Mok, a lawmaker for the information technology constituency, bemoaned the fact the licensing decision meant that HKTV was now having to fire staff because it had become the operator most active in investing in television in Hong Kong.

************

Article 2:

Source:  South China Morning Post

TV licensing row shows up fickle policy, critics say

Questions of judgment and policy consistency hung over the government as critics scoffed at what they saw as a lame explanation of why a high-profile broadcasting investor failed to secure a free-to-air television licence.

Veterans familiar with the industry are unconvinced by a minister's account on Tuesday in granting licences to i-Cable's Fantastic Television and PCCW's HK Television Entertainment (HKTVE) but not to Hong Kong Television Network (HKTV), chaired by media maverick Ricky Wong Wai-kay.

One critic suggested political undertones were at work as Wong had vowed during his 12-day reign at ATV that he would not turn the station into another CCTV, the mainland's nationwide state broadcaster.

On a radio show yesterday, Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Greg So Kam-leung said HKTV lost in terms of overall competitiveness.

So pointed to the importance of relevant experience. "We are not talking about the filming of one or two dramas, but running a television station," he said.

One marked difference between HKTV and the other two was the number of proposed channels: HKTV wanted to run 30 channels within six years of launch; Fantastic TV and HKTVE had suggested just two, he noted.

The Executive Council reached its conclusion after assessing the financial capability and programme planning of each applicant, he said.

The comments hinted that Wong could have been deemed too aggressive for sustainable development of the market.

Simon Ho Sai-hau, who sits on the Communications Authority's broadcast complaints committee, said that if 30 channels were too many, the government could ask the number to be cut.

Broadcasters commonly ran dozens of channels using shows produced externally, Ho said. As long as the station focused on one or two core channels, it would not strain finances.

Peter Lam Yuk-wah, vice-president of the Televisioners Association, said: "An investor can always hire experienced staff members to help him."

Lam questioned if the rejection was due to political reasons. "The central government may think it's hard to control him."

Political concerns aside, both veterans also pointed to government inconsistencies over liberalising the market.

As early as 1998, the government wanted to open the free-television sector to competition and emphasised that it would not limit the number of licences.

Yesterday, lawmakers got the latest government document that showed the rules of the game had changed over the years without the applicants' knowledge, which probably explained Wong's shock at his failed bid.

According to the document, a consultant had told the authority that the local market might not be able to support five players.

But the regulator was of the view that all three applicants fulfilled the financial and programming requirements and should receive approval. Market sustainability should not be a primary consideration, it said.

Both TVB and ATV opposed the recommendation and Exco, in view of their concerns, decided to introduce new operators in a "gradual and orderly approach" to minimise any adverse impact on the market, the document showed.

Lam said: "The government never informed the applicants of the new approach. In fact, it never told them what the criteria were for determining the winner. Why is it okay to have four television stations but not five?"

************

Article 3:

Source: South China Morning Post 

***NOTE:  This is an opinion piece written by a reporter at SCMP.***

Denial of licence for Ricky Wong's HKTV sorriest episode in free-TV saga

Written by Alex Lo at SCMP

Greg So Kam-leung had more than two years to defuse a political time bomb by coming up with an equitable decision on granting new free-TV licences and giving a reasonable explanation for it. Yet he failed miserably this week, and as a result more than a quarter of a million people expressed support for an online campaign against his decision. It's hard to screw up an official announcement this badly even if you try.

Thanks to the commerce chief, we have just seen revealed how our government really operates: favour the companies of established tycoons, undermine the investment and creative efforts of independent entrepreneurs, and exercise excessive state interference while claiming to open up an over-regulated, monopolistic market.

So duly announced two new licences will go to subsidiaries of PCCW and i-Cable, companies controlled respectively by Richard Li Tzar-kai, younger son of Hong Kong's most powerful businessman, Li Ka-shing, and Wharf supremo Peter Woo Kwong-ching, a former chief executive candidate. Left out in the cold is Hong Kong Television Network, led by Ricky Wong Wai-kay, the loud and brash entrepreneur who helped shake up the city's telecom and broadband industries.

Perhaps the government is too afraid he might do the same to the TV industry. In his announcement, So mentioned repeatedly the need to introduce new TV operators "in a gradual and orderly manner", a phrase he borrowed from the government's playbook on democratic reform. God forbid we have an operator that produces game-changing hit series and disruptive technologies.

So made much of financial stability. But we are not talking about too-big-to-fail banks. So what if a broadcaster goes under? Viewers will have fewer crappy soap operas to watch! No real explanation was given why HKTV was rejected when it has disclosed the most to the public about its finances - HK$900 million invested so far - and operations, such as the number of hours of original production and overseas programme purchases. We know next to nothing about the other two rivals.

This government is always complaining about Hong Kong losing its competitive edge. Guess who is to blame.

My Reaction to the Free TV License Issue……

As I’m sure all of you already know by now, the biggest ‘news’ related to the HK entertainment industry this week was that, after 4 years of waiting, the HK government FINALLY made a decision on the free TV license applications.   HK’s Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So announced the decision during a press conference that was held the day before yesterday.  

Normally, I would be thrilled – after all, these past few years, I’ve been a big supporter of the whole free TV license thing and was really hoping that finally, TVB’s monopoly over the TV industry would be broken.  BUT instead of being happy, I’m more angry than anything else….WHY?   Because once again, the stupid HK government (which can’t seem to do anything right nowadays) made a lame-arse decision that pretty much ‘reinforces’ TVB’s stronghold on the TV industry rather than breaking it.  Out of the 3 companies that submitted applications for free TV licenses, the government decided to approve and issue licenses to only 2 companies:  NowTV and i-Cable.   Yes, you read it right – only 2 licenses were approved, which means that the 3^rd company, HKTV’s, license application was ‘rejected’ (read that to mean that no license will be issued to HKTV).  When pressed about why HKTV’s license application was rejected, Mr. So refused to give a direct answer – instead, he kept going on and on about how they looked at many different criteria in order to come up with their decision and that the entire process was ‘fair and transparent’.  The only ‘hint’ that Mr. So would give about why HKTV was rejected was that their proposal was ‘weak’ in comparisons to the other 2 (um, talk about being ‘vague’….).  To add insult to injury, Mr. So also stated that the decision was final and that no ‘appeals’ will be allowed (any company that wishes to ‘protest’ the decision can only do so via the means of filing a judicial review through the courts).

In response to the government’s decision, HKTV’s Ricky Wong held a press conference yesterday expressing his disappointment at the government’s decision while at the same time demanding to know the ‘cause of death’ (aka why his application was rejected).  He also announced that HKTV won’t be closing shop, however he will need to lay off 320 employees in order to restructure the company in preparation for the challenges ahead.

Ok, so on to MY reaction to this whole thing….

Obviously, I’m pissed.  Why?  Ok, yes, a big part of it is because HKTV didn’t get their license after being ‘played’ by the government for 4 years (if I were Ricky Wong, I would absolutely sue the pants off those bastards).  I mean, honestly, I can’t think of any other word to describe what HKTV went through except that they were ‘played’ -- after all, the HK government was the one who ‘invited’ HKTV to submit an application 4 years ago, saying that they felt it was time to open up the HK free TV market.  Not only that, the Broadcasting Authority (now the Communications Authority) had already given their recommendation that all 3 companies should be issued licenses, plus the people of HK had all spoken up in support of this (HKTV had a 60 to 80% approval rating in various polls that were conducted throughout the past 4 years).  Yet now, the government decides to go back on their word and only issue 2 licenses because they feel that the market in HK can’t sustain more than 4 stations?  Well, why the hell didn’t they think of that 4 years ago????

Another reason I’m pissed is because of the fact that the government ‘refuses’ to explain why they rejected HKTV’s application.  I don’t know about you guys, but to me, it only makes sense that if you’re going to give someone the death penalty, you have an obligation to explain exactly why and how you came to that decision (sure, people can argue that this isn’t a ‘life or death’ situation, but honestly, I beg to differ, since people’s livelihoods are at stake).  The fact that the government continues to skirt the issue and will only give vague responses tells me that there is more to the decision than meets the eye.  Of course, the past few days, the reaction to the government’s decision has been huge and many people feel that the rejection of HKTV’s license application was politically motivated (despite the government’s insistence that ‘no political factors were involved’).  I can’t help but agree – the way this whole thing is playing out reeks of political maneuvering….in fact, I wouldn’t even be surprised if some ‘under the table’ dealings took place in order for the outcome to be what it ended up being (I’m not going to elaborate further on this – you guys can read between the lines….)

Third, the biggest reason why I’m pissed is because the HK government once again ignored the needs of its citizens and, to add salt to an already open wound, they just put 320 people out of jobs.   I guess in a sense, I shouldn’t be surprised, since, well, it’s government after all (if anyone knows of any government in this world that actually listens to its citizens and doesn't screw them over, please let me know because I would definitely like to live there…LOL).   I definitely feel sorry for the HKTV artists and behind the scenes people who will now be out of jobs…I’m especially saddened because majority of the artists who went to HKTV are people whom I grew up watching on TV the past 3 decades – after being ‘treated like crap’ by TVB, many of these artists went to HKTV and were treated extremely well (HKTV restored many of these artists’ dignity, pride, and passion for acting)….unfortunately, now all of that will go to waste…(when I think about how some of those artists may have to go ‘crawling’ back to TVB now, it pisses me off even more…).

Obviously, I could go on and on about this topic, especially given how much of my time I’ve spent these past 3 years or so ‘following’ this whole free TV license issue.  But for the purposes of this topic, I think it’s probably wise for me to conclude my post here rather than continue my ‘rant’ for another few pages (people who are familiar with my blog know that I try to stay away from political issues in my writings as much as possible)…..given the political element involved in this issue, I’ve probably said too much already….

For those who may be interested in reading up on this issue, here are a few links I recommend (the articles are all in English, so no translation necessary…):

From South China Morning Post:

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1332598/free-air-tv-still-question-marks-over-whether-shows-will-improve

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1332328/two-new-free-tv-licences-approved-backlash-over-hktvs-exclusion

From The Standard:

http://www.thestandard.com.hk/breaking_news_detail.asp?id=41965&icid=3&d_str=

http://www.thestandard.com.hk/breaking_news_detail.asp?id=41975&icid=3&d_str=

Follow-up to previous post: Communications Authority releases findings of TVB anti-competition investigation

As a follow up to my earlier post about the Communications Authority imposing a $900K fine against TVB due to their unfair anti-competition practices, I actually found another article that details the findings of the CA more thoroughly (this particular website basically re-printed the official press release issued by the CA).

Even though most of the content was already summarized in the SCMP article, I feel there are some more in-depth details in the CA’s release that are worth paying attention to (especially with regard to the different types of contracts TVB has).

In addition, the main reason why I’m posting the actual press release from the CA (which also links back to all the documentation involved in the CA’s investigation) is because I want people to see for themselves how the CA came up with the decision that they did, especially since TVB ‘claims’ (in their official statement) that the CA’s investigation is ‘without merit’ (which I interpret to mean that TVB feels the CA was working off of inaccurate information and therefore their assessment of TVB is wrong?).  In my opinion, the way TVB is responding to the CA’s investigation over this issue is very similar to the way they responded to the CA’s approval of additional free-to-air licenses – pretty much TVB is ‘crying foul’ and ‘claiming’ that the CA’s information is ‘bogus’ as well as ‘inaccurate’ (to be honest, this particular ‘excuse’ is getting old already…TVB really needs to come up with another excuse).  To me, TVB’s response and the way they are handling this whole ‘penalty’ issue is yet another classic example of them taking the ‘constantly in denial’ thing to the ultimate level…

.***.

Communications Authority releases findings of investigation into alleged violations of competition provisions of Broadcasting Ordinance by TVB

Source:  7thSpace Interactive

Hong Kong (HKSAR) - The following is issued on behalf of the Communications Authority:

The Communications Authority (formerly the Broadcasting Authority, collectively referred to as "the Authority" hereafter) today (September 19) announced the findings of the investigation into the complaint lodged by Asia Television Limited (ATV) against the alleged violations of the competition provisions of the Broadcasting Ordinance (BO) by Television Broadcasts Limited (TVB), a domestic free television (TV) programme service licensee. Based on the evidence collected, the Authority finds that some of the allegations are substantiated and that TVB has abused its dominant position by engaging in anti-competitive practices in contravention of sections 13 and 14 of the BO.

The investigation was initiated by a formal complaint from ATV against TVB on December 10, 2009, alleging that certain clauses in TVB'scontracts with its artistes and singers and certain informal policies and practices pursued by TVB had the purpose or effect of preventing, distorting and substantially restricting competition, thereby violating sections 13 and 14 of the BO. The Authority decided on August 28, 2010, to launch a full investigation into some of the contractual clauses and policies alleged in ATV's complaint.

The Authority has completed its investigation into the complaint.

After considering the evidence collected and the representations received (including information and representations submitted by TVB and other licensees, record companies and singers), the Authority concludes that the following four allegations are substantiated:

(a) exclusive occasional use artiste and singer (Note 1) contracts with harsh and unreasonable terms;

(b) artistes on serial-based (Note 2) and one-show contracts (Note 3) with TVB are prohibited from having their original voices when performing in other TV stations' programmes (no original voice policy);

(c) artistes on serial-based and one-show contracts with TVB are prohibited from attending promotional activities of the productions of other TV stations which also featured the artistes concerned (no promotion policy); and

(d) artistes on contracts with TVB are prevented from speaking Cantonese in the programmes of other TV stations in Hong Kong (no Cantonese policy).

The Authority finds that:

(a) Supply and demand of artistes

The evidence reviewed by the Authority indicates that during 2007 to 2010, TVB contracted with a significant proportion of all the artistes on contract with the main Hong Kong broadcasters. Information gathered from record companies also suggests that approximately 90 per cent of singers entered into contracts with TVB. Apart from full-time contracts, TVB entered into three types of occasional use contracts with artistes and singers, including one-show contracts, serial-based contracts and singer contracts.

(b) Relevant markets and assessment of market power

On the basis of the analytical framework set out in the Competition Investigation Procedures and the Guidelines to Application of the Competition Provisions of the BO, the Authority finds that there are two relevant economic markets: all TV viewing market and TV advertising market.

TVB possesses a dominant position in both markets.

(c) TVB's conduct

(i) Exclusive contracts

In the one-show and serial-based contracts, TVB has inserted provisions that require the artiste either to obtain consent from TVB before engaging in outside work, or to be totally exclusive to TVB during the contractual period subject to TVB consenting otherwise. A small number of one-show contracts require the artistes concerned to notify TVB prior to undertaking outside work. As for singers, they are either required to obtain consent from TVB before engaging in outside work or give TVB prior notification before engaging in outside work.

In addition, all occasional use contracts contain a clause that TVB is not under an obligation to use the contracted artistes.

The data provided by TVB suggests that there are a significant number of artistes under one-show, serial-based and singer contracts who are not fully engaged by TVB during the contractual period and are fully capable of rendering their services to rival local TV stations, yet are still subject to the exclusivity terms. Even though it is theoretically possible for TVB artistes and singers to obtain consent from TVB or give TVB prior notice to appear on rival local stations, in reality, the consent clauses in the artiste and singer contracts impose de facto exclusivity. For example, between 2007 and 2010, TVB approved very few applications from artistes for performing outside work and none of the applications approved by TVB involved artistes working for TVB's rival TV stations in Hong Kong.

In addition, TVB has only received very few notifications from singers to appear on other TV broadcasters.

The clauses artificially impair rivals' ability to produce high-quality TV productions to compete with TVB and have also raised rivals' costs by making it more expensive for them to produce or acquire TV programmes featuring artistes. When these clauses are used in conjunction with the no-obligation-to-use clause, it allows TVB to warehouse artistes at minimal cost.

TVB has not provided any reasonable objective justifications for these clauses. The Authority is of the view that the "exclusive clauses" have the purpose and effect of foreclosing rivals' access to artistes and singers.

(ii) No original voice and no promotion policies

The no original voice and no promotion policies are encapsulated in a significant proportion of TVB's one-show contracts and serial-based contracts.

The Authority is of the view that the likely objective economic purpose of these policies is to impair rivals' ability to compete with TVB and to raise their costs. Where rivals wish to broadcast programmes which feature a TVB contracted artiste, they will face higher costs, and the perceived quality and attractiveness of the programming will likely be reduced. They will also be constrained in their promotional activities.

There is no acceptable objective justification offered by TVB for these policies.

(iii) No Cantonese policy

While the no Cantonese policy is not explicitly imposed through a contractual clause, the Authority is of the opinion that the amount of evidence examined by the Authority (including records of artistes' interviews on Cable TV and evidence submitted by other licensees, singers and record companies) shows that it is actively practised amongst singers as a result of TVB's policy. This policy affected a very large proportion of singers and some proportion of artistes. The likely plausible objective economic purpose of this policy is to impair rivals' ability to compete with TVB.

None of the reasons offered by TVB could objectively justify the policy. The no Cantonese policy has the capability of both reducing the quality of interviews of singers in rival TV stations and making it more difficult for viewers to understand, thus impairing rivals' ability to compete with TVB.

Given the above, the Authority decides:

(a) to impose a fine of $900,000 on TVB;

(b) to direct TVB under section 16 of the BO to forthwith bring to an end the infringement concerned, and refrain from repeating or engaging in any act or conduct which has an equivalent purpose or effect to the infringing clauses and policies;

(c) that TVB shall, within three months (i.e. on or before December 18, 2013), communicate to all artistes and singers who have current serial-based, one-show or singer contracts with TVB that TVB abandons the infringing contractual clauses and policies; issue a public statement within two weeks (i.e.

on or before October 2, 2013) explaining and declaring that TVB will not require singers and artistes which it engages to refrain from speaking Cantonese on other TV stations in Hong Kong; and

(d) that TVB shall provide a full written report to the Authority within four months (i.e. on or before January 18, 2014) describing the steps taken by TVB to comply with this direction.

As regards ATV's complaint about the "one station buy" policy (Note 4) allegedly practised by TVB, although the Authority finds no evidence to substantiate the allegation, the Authority is of the view that the "one station buy" policy has the capability to be exclusionary and undermine other broadcasters' ability to compete. The Authority would like to make clear that, provisionally, the "one station buy" policy will not generally be acceptable and should not be practised by licensees in dominant positions or with market power.

The full investigation report is published on the Authority's website (www.coms-auth.hk/en/report_investigation_into_TVB).

An executive summary of the investigation report is at www.coms-auth.hk/en/summary_investigation_into_TVB.

Note 1: For singer contracts, singers are engaged on a show-by-show basis. TVB and the singers agree that the singers will appear in TVB's shows if the need arises at agreed-upon rates.

Note 2: Serial-based contracts refer to contracts between TVB and its artistes in which the parties agree to a rate for a drama series of varying lengths.

Note 3: One-show contracts refer to contracts between TVB and its artistes in which the artistes are only signed for a minimum one-show commitment. TVB and the artistes agree that they will appear in TVB's shows if the need arises at agreed-upon rates.

Note 4: ATV complained that TVB had allegedly implemented this policy, whereby TVB offered higher discount rates to advertisers which undertook not to place advertisements with ATV.


Source: HKSAR Government

BREAKING NEWS: TVB fined HK$900,000 for anti-competition practices **UPDATED**

**HOT OFF THE PRESS**

I just saw the below article in the news and I must say that I almost jumped up and down for joy after I read it (LOL)!!

FINALLY the government is doing something right!  TVB should have been penalized long ago for their ‘antics’ and it looks like now it’s finally happening (albeit it still took a long time, since according to the article, ATV filed their claims in 2009 and the CA just issued a ruling today – 4 years later!).

The part that I’m most happy about is that the CA is requiring TVB to ‘abandon’ the anti-competitive practices within 3 months – which means that they would no longer be able to restrict artists from appearing on other TV stations and such.  So in other words, there is ‘hope’ that the TVB monopoly will finally be broken (though of course, since TVB is planning on filing an appeal, this could still be tangled up in the courts for awhile).

Anyway, still happy nonetheless…gotta go celebrate now!  See ya!!

.****.

TVB fined HK$900,000 for anti-competition practices

Source:  South China Morning Post

Hong Kong’s free-to-air broadcaster Television Broadcasts (TVB) was fined HK$900,000 by the city’s communications watchdog on Thursday for engaging in anti-competition practices.

These included “harsh and unreasonable” terms in contracts with some artistes and singers, and a “no Cantonese policy” that prohibits TVB contract artistes from speaking Cantonese on other Hong Kong TV stations’ programmes, the Communications Authority said on Thursday.

The authority earlier launched an investigation into TVB, the bigger of the city’s two free-to-air television broadcasters, after rival Asia Television (ATV) lodged a complaint in December 2009 alleging that the station violated the competition provisions of the Broadcasting Ordinance.

Two other policies adopted by TVB concerning its artistes on serial-based and one-show contracts were also deemed to be anti-competition practices, the authority said.

These involved banning artistes on these contracts from using their original voices when performing on other TV stations’ programmes, and from attending promotional activities for the productions of other stations which also featured the performers concerned.

In serial-based contracts, TVB and its artistes agree to a rate for a drama series of varying lengths. In one-show contracts, artistes are only signed for a minimum one-show commitment at agreed-upon rates with the station.

There were also exclusive occasional-use artiste and singer contracts where they were engaged on a show-by-show basis. They would appear in TVB shows “if the need arises” and the broadcaster has no obligation to use the contracted performers.

The authority said TVB had a significant number of artistes under one-show, serial-based and singer contracts, who were not fully engaged during the contractual period and were fully capable of rendering their services to rival local stations but were still subject to the exclusivity terms.

Although artistes and singers could apply to TVB for its consent for appearance on rival stations under these contracts, the station had approved none of these applications between 2007 and 2010.

“The clauses artificially impair rivals’ ability to produce high-quality TV productions to compete with TVB and have also raised rivals’ costs by making it more expensive for them to produce or acquire TV programmes featuring [these] artistes,” the authority said.

“The authority is of the view that the ‘exclusive clauses’ have the purpose and effect of foreclosing rivals’ access to artistes and singers.”

The maximum penalty allowed by law for anti-competition violations is HK$1 million.  Given that the station made remedies, including cancelling one-show contracts, the authority reached the conclusion that a fine of HK$900,000 was appropriate..

Apart from the fine, TVB is required to abandon its anti-competition practices within three months and issue a public statement within two weeks to state that it will no longer require its singers and artistes to refrain from speaking Cantonese on other TV stations in Hong Kong. It also has to submit a report to the authority within four months.

Former TVB artist Felix Wong Yat-wah, now with HKTV, applauded the authority's  findings, caliing them “righteous”.


Additional reporting Amy Nip

*****

TVB released an official statement a few hours after the CA's ruling in which they responded to the CA's decision and also emphasized 4 main points...

TVB’s official statement in response to the Communications Authority’s ruling:

1)      TVB has given its full cooperation to the Communications Authority throughout the investigation into this matter.

2)      ATV’s ‘complaints’ are unwarranted and without merit.  Therefore, we feel that the Communication Authority’s ruling is disappointing, regrettable, and without basis.

3)      TVB has always been the ‘foundation’ [TN: TVB used the word ‘cradle’] for the training and cultivation of talent for the Hong Kong entertainment industry.  Over the years, TVB has cultivated and trained over a thousand stars for the music, movie, and television industries, with many of these stars entering the international arena and bringing pride to HK people.  The foundation for these great accomplishments are based on our first-rate artist management policies as well as the tremendous investment of resources over the years.

4)      There are countless artists out there who choose to pursue a career in the entertainment industry and are not TVB contracted artists.  Therefore, we feel that our policies with regard to TVB-contracted artists do not hinder the operations of other TV stations or affect the overall development of the industry.

Towards the Communication Authority’s investigation and outcome, TVB will consult with our legal experts and seek further legal action as necessary.

Weibo Fever #19: Is the Hong Kong Music Industry Truly "Dead"??

Not sure how many people read the news today, but looks like there is a pretty big ‘controversy’ brewing on Weibo right now and since I haven’t blogged about the HK music industry in quite some time, I figured this would be a good ‘relevant’ topic to write about…

First, here’s the ‘gist’ of what happened….

Food connoisseur (and former actor as well as entertainment reporter) Benny Li (李純恩) wrote an opinion piece for a local magazine entitled “The Death of the HK Music Industry”.  In his editorial piece, Benny states his opinion that the ‘death’ of the HK music industry is due to the lack of musical talent in HK currently, with majority of the blame being placed on songwriters (specifically lyricists) for their ‘messy’ lyrics that in many cases, boil down to ‘nonsensical jibberish’.  He claims that many songwriters nowadays lack the ability to write lyrics that truly resonate on an emotional level with music fans – unlike past songwriters who actually wrote songs that were meaningful and had the ability to move people.

After Benny Li reposted his opinion piece on Weibo, HK lyricist Wyman Wong (黄偉文) replied to his post with a ‘scathing’ post of his own, pretty much scolding Benny for what he wrote and also insisting that Benny doesn’t know what he is talking about.  Based on his response, looks like Wyman took personal offense to Benny’s post and even went so far as to ‘infer’ that Benny was referring specifically to him….even Benny asked Wyman on Weibo ‘Wyman, was I referring to you specifically in my post?’ to which Wyman replied ‘What do you think?’ (um, ok, to be fair, Wyman’s name wasn’t even mentioned in Benny’s post – as an ‘outsider’ reading the article, I actually felt that he was speaking more in a general sense rather than targeting anyone in particular).  

Well, the ‘controversial’ part is that almost immediately after Wyman’s response, many HK lyricists as well as singers such as Anthony Wong, Hacken Lee, Kay Tse, Richie Ren, etc. responded to the issue on Weibo – pretty much all of them expressed similar sentiments as Wyman and insisted that the HK music industry is ‘not dead’.

Honestly, I don’t see what the big deal is.  Benny Li was just expressing his personal opinion of the HK music industry – true or not, it’s his opinion based on his experience.  Therefore, to me, Wyman overreacted – not sure why he would take offense to Benny’s post or why he felt that Benny was referring specifically to him (based on Wyman’s response on weibo, sounds to me like he harbors a personal dislike of Benny and so took this opportunity to chastise him??).

Besides, it’s not like what Benny said is false – he actually does have quite a few valid points in his post…and come on, I’m sure anyone who isn’t blind can see that the HK music industry has deteriorated greatly from what it was in the past.  Sure, saying that the music industry is ‘dead’ might be a bit too exaggerated, since there are still some truly great talents left in the industry – but let’s face it, the music industry isn’t exactly ‘flourishing’ either.

Personally, the part that I find disappointing is how so many people within the music industry are ‘jumping on the bandwagon’ to defend Wyman and bash Benny – that just shows me that a lot of industry people are still in ‘denial’ mode about the state of the music industry….I mean, if people within the music industry refuse to even acknowledge the problem, then how much hope is there that things will get better?

Of course, I can also see why the music industry people would respond the way they did – after all, they don’t want the younger generation and others still active in the music industry to feel disheartened or discouraged from making music.  BUT STILL….it goes back to my original point – I’m not faulting anyone for trying to be positive and optimistic, but there comes a point when we have to face reality….besides, the below is Benny's personal opinion -- if his opinion doesn't matter and he doesn't know what he's talking about, then why should anyone feel 'discouraged' by what he said?

.***

Anyway, below is Benny Li’s editorial piece in Chinese (didn’t get a chance to translate it yet, so my apologies to those who aren’t able to read it…if I get a chance later on, I’ll translate it and re-post it back up):

Edit:  Here's the translation of Benny's editorial:

HK Headline Editorial:  The ‘Death’ of the HK Music Industry

Written by:  Benny Li

While eating dinner at a restaurant, a charity fundraising program started airing on the restaurant’s television set.  The program featured performances from many of the HK music industry’s newbie singers and as they were singing, the lyrics to their songs were displayed on the screen as well.  Reading the lyrics to some of their songs, nine out of 10 were ‘unintelligible’ – I couldn’t identify a single song whose lyrics were clear and coherent.  And to think that those singers tried to sing those songs with as much emotion as they could muster.

When it comes to a song, the melody is what attracts people to it and the lyrics are what moves people emotionally – in this world, there is not a single ‘classic’ where only the melody is nice to listen to but the lyrics are unintelligible.  The reason why the HK music industry is ‘dead’ now is because lyrics are ‘dead’.  If lyrics are ‘dead’, then they can no longer move people emotionally and without this trait, a song naturally ‘dies’ as well.  In today’s HK music industry, the lyrics to many ‘works’ can’t even fulfill the ‘basic’ requirement of being coherent and intelligible – most of the lyrics don’t even flow and in many cases, are merely sounds mixed in with musical notes.  With these songs, it’s hard enough for the singers to even remember the lyrics, let alone expecting them to resonate with and move audiences.  Given this problem, how is it possible for these ‘works’ to continue to be passed down to future generations?

The HK music industry was once a thriving, flourishing industry that had a significant impact on the Chinese community all over the world.  So many classic hits were passed down from one generation to the next and continued to remain strong even as the years passed, to the point that even people who didn’t understand Cantonese could still sing the songs.  The reason for this is because the lyrics to many of those songs resonated with the masses and therefore were able to touch people’s hearts.

Today, the music industry is very different.  Even in Taiwan and Mainland China, there are many great memorable songs, yet the younger generation of HK singers don’t seem to have very many songs that people actually remember.  Why?  Well, one of the main reasons is that people don’t even know what in the world these singers are singing because the lyrics are ‘messy’ and pointless – when we look at the lyrics to a lot of these songs, they are merely a bunch of Chinese characters strung together haphazardly.

The weird thing is that many of the HK songwriters nowadays seem to be ‘illiterate’ and don’t know how to write.  If not, how else can we explain why our music industry produces so many such ‘unintelligible’ songs?  This is what I call a ‘self-inflicted calamity’ and as the saying goes, ‘when we bring calamities upon ourselves, no one can save us from it!’  With the HK music industry being ‘dead’ to this point – all I can say is:  serves us right!

And below is Wyman’s response on Weibo:

黄伟文:公道自在人心，李先生是個連「自黎彼得以後香港就再沒有好歌詞」這樣的話也說得出的人，到底是我在呃版税瞎填一通，還是他在騙稿費胡言亂吠，就交給大家評價了。

Translation:  Wyman Wong’s response:  Facts speak louder than words!  Mr. Li is the same person who also claims that ‘after Peter Lai (黎彼得), there are no good lyricists in HK’ – the type of person who makes such outrageous statements!  So does this mean that I’m just blindly writing jibberish songs in order to cheat royalty fees or is he [Benny] trying to cheat writer’s fees with his nonsensical barking?  I’ll let you guys be the judge.

.*****

What are your thoughts on this issue?

BREAKING NEWS: James Shing quits role as ATV's executive director

I’ve been really busy recently, so haven’t had a chance to update my blog (my apologies once again to those who continue to read and support my blog).  There have actually been quite a lot of ‘developments’ in the world of HK entertainment in the past few months as well as many many articles worth reading / translating – unfortunately though, I haven’t been able to find much time  to spare with my busy schedule to do much translating….with that said however, I have definitely continued to keep up with the latest in HK entertainment news so I can keep myself current on the latest happenings and such.

For those who have been reading up on HK entertainment news, the ‘biggest’ news of late is of course the ‘controversy’ surrounding ATV and its executive director James Shing.   To be honest, I’ve never liked Mr. Shing from the beginning (when he took over ATV several years ago) – the guy has always been a worthless ‘puppet’ under the control of ATV investor Wong Ching and his ‘antics’ the past 3 years or so pretty much prove how much of an idiot he is.  Therefore, when I heard the ‘news’ last week that the Communications Authority (aka the Broadcasting Authority) won its case against ATV and not only penalized the station (in the form of monetary fine), but also gave them an ‘ultimatum’ – ATV must fire its chief executive director James Shing within 7 days (deadline is September 1^st) or else risk having its free-to-air TV license revoked – I was actually very very ECSTATIC!!! 

While it’s true that I’ve never been a fan or supporter of ATV and to be very honest, that station has been run into the toilet so badly over the past decade that it’s beyond salvageable (which means that I could really care less what happens to the station), part of me still remembers ATV’s ‘glory days’ back in the 70s (when it was still under its previous name of Rediffusion Television) as well as 80s/early 90s.  Sure, ATV was never able to ‘surpass’ TVB in terms of ratings or popularity, but there were numerous times when ATV actually WAS a formidable ‘competitor’ against TVB in that TVB actually felt ‘threatened’ by the station’s existence and therefore rolled out a lot of great programming to combat this ‘threat’ (yup, so ATV’s 56 year existence didn’t go completely to waste).  Plus there are quite a few artists and behind the scenes people who came from ATV and whom I’ve ‘followed’ for many years, so for their sake I don’t want to ‘discredit’ ATV completely.  So pretty much, even though I don’t really give a damn about ATV nowadays, I still pay attention to news about them and yes, I still do get pissed off when I read about the imbecilic management who run ATV (honestly, those morons make TVB’s management look like ‘angels’…LOL!!). 

Anyway, I went ahead and posted the latest article I found about James Shing quitting his executive director post at ATV (though it’s actually not the best article on the issue – I’ve read quite a few articles on the subject lately and there are plenty of articles out there that are more detailed….I chose this particular one merely because it’s written in English so I wouldn’t have to translate it…). 

While James Shing’s ‘resignation’ won’t necessarily mean the ‘end’ to Wong Ching’s involvement in ATV’s affairs (especially since it’s rumored that the new executive director also has ties to Wong Ching), at least it’s a step in the right direction in terms of the HK government FINALLY doing something about the ‘corrupt’ HK television industry by forcing out people who should never be involved in the television business in the first place.  Though I feel that the ‘ousting’ of James Shing is “too little, too late” and most likely won’t do a thing to change ATV’s fate in the long run, I can’t help feeling happy about the situation. 

Lastly…this may sound mean, but I just have to say it….

GOOD RIDDANCE, MR. SHING!!!   You definitely WON’T be missed -- though I do echo the sentiments of many former ATV employees such as director Wong Jing, Chapman To, Anthony Wong, Elena Kong, etc. who have all publicly stated that they wish James Shing continues to REFUSE all attempts at ousting him because then that means ATV will finally get its license revoked (it’s truly sad when even ATV’s former employees don’t support the station and instead want to see it closed down…haha…talk about ‘no eye see’!).  What the future will hold for ATV in the long run is uncertain, but one thing’s for sure – in the short term, this move will at least hold ATV over until 2015 when its license is set to expire….my prediction is that ATV won’t survive beyond that…whether that’s a ‘good’ thing or ‘bad’ one – you decide for yourself!

 ****************

James Shing quits role as ATV's executive director

Station chief complies with part of government order to resign, but may still be on ATV board

Source:  South China Morning Post

Article originally posted September 2, 2013 (originally written in English by Vivienne Chow at SCMP)

ATV's James Shing Pan-yu has finally relinquished his role as the broadcaster's executive director.

Yesterday, ATV announced that it had on Saturday received documents signed by Shing confirming his resignation from the position immediately.

But it was unclear if he had also quit the ATV board.

Shing is required by the Communications Authority to step down from both his roles as executive director and board director by today.

The order came after the authority released its investigation report on ATV on August 23, concluding that Shing had breached the licensing terms by allowing investor Wong Ching to exercise de facto control over the station. Shing and Wong are relatives.

The authority said Shing was no longer a "fit and proper person" for the role as stipulated in the Broadcasting Ordinance. It also fined the station HK$1 million for the breach.

Shing, who was executive director for more than three years, last week said he was "willing to sacrifice himself for ATV".

Yesterday, it remained unclear if he had fully complied with the authority's order, but the Companies Registry showed he remained a board director.

ATV did not respond to queries on this matter by press time. Shing could not be contacted.

The authority said it would continue to monitor ATV to ensure that the broadcaster complied with its ruling. Meanwhile, ATV said Louie King-bun, who was late last month appointed a board director, would replace Shing.

Louie, who was formerly executive editor of pro-Beijing newspaper Ta Kung Pao, joined ATV as vice-president last year.

He became mired in controversy after an episode of ATV Focus, of which he is in charge, ran critical comments against student group Scholarism for opposing the introduction of national education classes at the height of the debate last year.

The Communications Authority received more than 10,000 complaints against the programme after it aired last September.

But the controversy did little to mar Louie's rapidly advancing career in ATV - in June, he was promoted to senior vice-president, succeeding the retiring Kwong Hoi-ying.

A Look into the Past: Recounting TVB’s Most Influential TV Series of All Time (Part 2)

Here’s the second article in the multi-part ‘TV History’ retrospective that TVB Weekly magazine published recently.   I’ve actually been a bit behind on translations lately, so I haven’t been able to get to as many of these as I would like -- I believe there are 14 or 15 articles to this retrospective, so obviously there is still a ways to go before I finish the entire series of articles….for those who have been ‘following’ this retrospective and are anxious to read subsequent articles, I must sincerely apologize for my ‘slowness’ in working on these.   The magazine scans I used this time around aren’t that great either (pictures rather than actual scans), but they will have to suffice for now....if I get a chance to do so later on, I’ll switch out the pictures with better quality ones (don’t hold me to it though, since I may get busy and end up forgetting…).

Anyway, just some quick commentary on the article itself…

I actually haven’t watched the 1970s version of Legend of the Book and the Sword, so can’t really vouch for whether it’s good or not.  The version I’m actually most familiar with is the 1987 TVB remake with Nixon Pang, Jacqueline Law, Fiona Leung, etc. – despite the horrible casting choice of Nixon Pang as the male lead (I sort of ranted about this in the comments to my ‘Tribute to So Hang Suen’ article), the series overall was quite well-made, not to mention the rest of the cast (outside of the male lead) was STELLAR!  I highly recommend watching the 80s version (try to ignore Nixon if you can…LOL), as the ‘all-star’ cast and well-written adapted script are well worth the effort.  As for the 70s version – well, I guess if you’re a fan of any of the leads (Adam Cheng, Gigi Wong, Liza Wang, Louise Lee, etc.), then it’s probably a nice classic to watch (though I’m pretty sure that the 70s version is hard to find now given that so many years have passed…).

The other 2 series mentioned in this article (The Hotel and A House is Not a Home) I actually have watched, however I don’t remember a whole lot from either series because the last time I watched was like back in the 90s some time.  The Hotel is often mentioned in retrospectives and other shows / features about TVB history, so I do have more memory of that series than the other one – the most ‘famous’ scene from the series is of course the one mentioned in the article where Deborah Lee's character shoots and kills Chow Yun Fat’s character (believe me, that scene is so ‘famous’ that people who haven’t watched the series will probably remember it if they saw it, since TVB retrospective shows love playing that scene all the time…LOL!).  The series was one of Chow Yun Fat’s numerous collaborations with Cora Miao and to be honest, I sometimes get that particular series mixed up with a few other ones from the same time period (that happened to feature much of the same cast).  In any case, I do agree that Fat Gor and Cora were a pretty good-looking couple, but my favorite Chow Yun Fat pairing will always be him and Dodo Cheng (they’re actually my all-time favorite couple from the 70s era).

As for the series A House is Not a Home – well, let’s just say that all I remember is Liza Wang’s Lok Lam (including her famous hairstyle…LOL) and Simon Yam’s controversial character…that’s pretty much as far as my memory extends…

For those who are interested in reading part 1 of this ‘special feature’, the link is included below (though to be honest, that article covers the 1960s and early 1970s eras, which is likely before any of us were even born).  It does make for some interesting reading about early TVB history though!

Part 1:  http://llsmusings.blogspot.com/2013/05/a-look-into-past-recounting-tvbs-most.html

*****

TVB Weekly Magazine Special Feature:  The Most Influential TV Dramas from the Past 45 Years  (Part 2)

Source:  TVB Zone, Issue 819

Article originally published March 4, 2013

Translated by: llwy12

In 1976, TVB produced its first ‘wuxia’ (武俠) series adapted from one of famous novelist Louis Cha’s (金庸) popular works:  The Legend of the Book and the Sword (書劍恩仇錄).  With its status as the inaugural wuxia series as well as Jin Yong adaptation for TVB, this 60 episode grand production is considered one of TVB’s most important drama series from the past 45 years.   It comes as no surprise then that the series featured an all-star cast, however what made this series truly ‘legendary’ is that it did something that even today is unprecedented:  the series featured all 3 of TVB’s most popular first line ‘fa dans’ at the time:  Liza Wang (汪明荃), Louise Lee (李司棋), and Gigi Wong (黃淑儀) – in TVB’s 45 year history, this was the first and only time that the 3 of them participated in a series together as the female leads. 

The series’ male lead was veteran actor/singer Adam Cheng (鄭少秋), who was already a popular ‘siu sang’ at the time despite only playing lead roles in a few TV series.  In a brave but risky move, producer Wong Tin Lam (王天林) cast Adam in 3 of the series’ pivotal roles (Chan Ka Lok, Emperor Qianglong, and Fook On Hong).  The difficulty of portraying 3 different characters with unique personalities (in the same series) can be a challenge to even the most seasoned of actors, let alone someone who only started playing lead roles a few years back.  However, Adam stepped up to the challenge – his performance in this series not only made him a ‘household name’, it also set the stage for him to be cast in numerous ‘wuxia hero’ roles throughout the rest of his career.

Rounding out the ‘all-star’ cast for this epic production were many of TVB’s ‘heavyweight’ veteran actors and actresses from that generation, including Chu Kong (朱江), Candice Yu (余安安), Wong Yuen San (黃元申), Ha Yu (夏雨), Lawrence Ng Wai Kwok (伍衛國), Deborah Lee (狄波拉), Shek Kin (石堅), Kwan Hoi San (關海山), Ko Miu Si (高妙思), etc.

For the 1976 version of The Legend of the Book and the Sword to have such epic status in HK television history, the ‘once in a lifetime’ collaboration of TVB’s ‘big 3’ fa dans no doubt played an important role.

100 episode full length series The Hotel (狂潮) sets precedence

That same year (1976), there was another grand production series produced that is an important part of any discussion about TVB’s most influential drama series:  the 129 episode family conflict-themed series The Hotel (狂潮).  With Chow Yun Fat (周潤發) and Cora Miao (繆騫人) leading an all-star ensemble cast,  The Hotel was an important series on many levels – not only was it TVB’s first foray into the ‘large family conflict’ theme [which obviously becomes a common theme in many of TVB’s subsequent series], but it was also TVB’s first attempt at producing a full length (each episode was 1 hour) drama series that spanned more than 100 episodes.

With such an important series, the production was definitely not taken lightly – TVB invested heavily in the series on all fronts:  cast, script, and even filming location.  In order to get the best results possible, the production team specially rented a 10,000 square feet factory building in Kwai Chung for filming.  In addition, the cast and crew filmed many of the scenes in real life hotels and cafes in HK rather than on a set inside the studio – the result was a more realistic effect that audiences could more easily relate to.

As far as cast goes – not only did the series catapult the 3 the core characters in the series (Chow Yun Fat’s Siu Wah San, Cora Miao’s Cheng Si Ka, and Deborah Lee’s Lui Yan) to instant stardom, it also had a far-reaching effect on HK society as a whole.  At the time the series aired [November 1976 to early 1977], practically all of HK’s television-viewing audiences would stay home and ‘chase’ the series – as a result, many of HK’s restaurants and eateries saw a huge decrease in business during the usual peak dinner timeslot in which the series was broadcast, especially during the weeks when the series’ story arcs reached climactic moments.  When the series aired its finale episode – which consisted of the ‘famous’ scene where Deborah’s Lui Yan shoots and kills Chow Yun Fat’s Siu Wah San – it was reported that 9 out of 10 eateries (restaurants) in HK were practically empty!  This proved that the popularity of the series had already reached ‘fanatic’ levels.

This grand series also had another ‘unique’ and ‘unprecedented’ characteristic:  the countless number of ‘heavyweight’ stars who participated in the series, whether in a recurring role or guest star/cameo role, each had their own unique story arc and it wasn’t until close to the end of the series that the plot was tied back to the main story of Chow Yun Fat’s character seeking revenge on the Cheng family. [TN: As a point of reference, some of the ‘famous names’ who participated in this series include:  Shek Kin, Chu Kong, Gigi Wong, Damian Lau (劉松仁), Lee Heung Kam (李香琴), Miu Kam Fung (苗金鳳), Helena Law (羅蘭), Cecilia Wong (黃杏秀), Meg Lam (林建明), So Hang Suen (蘇杏璇), Simon Yam (任達華), Susanna Kwan (關菊英), Candice Yu, Lawrence Ng Wai Kwok, Wong Wan Choi (黃允財), Kwan Hoi San, etc.]

Due to its well-written story arcs, numerous climactic and suspenseful moments, talented cast, and meticulous production, The Hotel garnered tremendously high ratings when it aired and also set the stage for TVB’s subsequent wave of 100 episode drama series.

 A House Is Not a Home (家變) gives rise to ‘successful career woman’ craze

On August 1, 1977, TVB introduced another ‘family conflict’-themed grand production – the 110 episode  A House Is Not a Home (家變).  This series is important in HK television history because of 2 main reasons.  First, when the series premiered back in 1977, it garnered unprecedented high ratings of 95%, which was equivalent to approximately 5 million viewers – this makes the series one of the ‘most watched’ series in television history.  The second reason is of course the ‘iconic’ character of Lok Lam (洛琳):  the series’ main female protagonist played by Liza Wang.  The character left such a deep impression on audiences at the time that it led to a phenomenon rarely ever seen in HK television history:  the hairstyle that Liza had in the series was so popular that it spawned a trend-setting ‘craze’ whereby many of HK’s young women would run to their local hair salon while the series was airing so that they could get a ‘Lok Lam style’ hairdo.   In addition, the character of Lok Lam also gave rise to the ‘successful career woman’ (女強人) term that started to become more widely used in HK after the series aired.

Of course, the success of a series doesn’t depend on one person alone.  As the saying goes:  ‘a peony flower may be good in and of itself, but still requires its green leaves to support it.’  If Liza Wang was considered the ‘peony flower’ in this series, then actor Chu Kong should definitely be counted as the best ‘green leaf’ for her -- his character Chim Pak Lam was absolutely the ‘ultimate match’ for Lok Lam.  While the couple’s ‘love/hate’ romance in the series was certainly heart-wrenching to many viewers, the friction between the two characters also provided many emotion-charged moments for audiences.

It can be said that one of the biggest draws of this series was its incredible cast, which included many household names such as Chow Yun Fat, Ha Yu, Simon Yam, Nam Hung (南紅), Lee Heung Kam, Tang Bik Wan (鄧碧雲), etc. – however another important element was its strong, fast-paced storyline.  In order to make the series more relevant to audiences, the production team added in story arcs involving ‘hot topics’ in society at the time – for example, the infamous corruptions involving the ICAC during the 1970s era.

A House Is Not a Home was an ‘innovative’ series not just because of its story, but also with the unconventional way it tackled such things as promotion for the series.  For example, when the episode about Lok Lam’s father Lok Fai’s (played by veteran actor Bak Man Biu 白文彪) sudden disappearance aired, promoters for the series took out front page search ads in all of HK’s major newspapers with a message from the ‘Lok family’ stating how much they miss Lok Fai and for him to contact them immediately upon seeing the message.  Such a promotional tactic was a first in the HK television industry and definitely set a high standard to follow for future generations to come.