Thomas Gnocchi has been the Head of the European Union Office to Hong Kong and Macau since September 1st, 2020 — arriving amidst the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic and just a few months after Beijing’s National Security Law (NSL) was introduced in Hong Kong.

Now, just four years later, he will soon be departing Hong Kong for a new assignment in Tokyo, Japan. Before leaving, Ambassador Gnocchi spoke at an FCC Club Lunch event alongside First Vice President Morgan Davis to summarise his experience during a pivotal period in Hong Kong’s history.

“It’s a real pleasure to address the FCC Club Lunch. This is my last public event before leaving, so I’m particularly happy that this is taking place here at the FCC,” he began.

To kick off the discussion, Davis first asked Gnocchi how he would characterise his past four years in the city.

“I think it would have been even wilder had I come the year before,” said Gnocchi.

Gnocchi referenced the anti-government protests of 2019 that were caused by a now-withdrawn amendment to the Fugitive Offenders Ordinance, which would have allowed suspected criminals from Hong Kong, Macau, or Taiwan to be extradited to mainland China for trial. Protests were fueled further by the Hong Kong Police Force’s alleged use of excessive force against demonstrators.

After months of large-scale protests that extended into the first half of 2020, Beijing pushed for the NSL in Hong Kong, which stamped out nearly all forms of criticism towards the local and central government. In early 2024, the Hong Kong government then enacted Article 23 of the Basic Law which aimed to “plug the gaps” not covered by Beijing’s NSL. Article 23 has been criticised by various sectors for its seemingly vague definitions of national security and state secrets.

These events ultimately set up Gnocchi for a new political landscape in Hong Kong unlike anything the EU Office had previously experienced.

“I think my job here in the EU Office here was very, very different to that of my predecessors [who] weren’t dealing with these more political topics. We’re out of the pandemic, but [these] political changes have changed Hong Kong quite a bit in this relatively short period of time,” Gnocchi said.

Some of the new changes that Gnocchi noted in his talk were the amount of self-censorship that journalists now engage in while reporting under these new conditions, as well as the city’s declining press freedom environment and the closure of various independent news organisations.

Apple Daily and Stand News are just two of the many media outlets that have been shut down since the implementation of Article 23 and the NSL. Also, Hong Kong’s ranking in Reporters Without Borders’ World Press Freedom Index has fallen to 135 out of 180, and many of the city’s journalists have confirmed in various indices and surveys that they have censored their work more often over the past few years.

“I’ve had several instances where a reporter says, ‘Well, we can’t really carry that.’ I’ve seen it first hand, this self-censorship,” Gnocchi recalled.

Davis then asked if it’s possible for these laws to be undone, which Gnocchi agreed is possible but would take a tremendous amount of effort to change the legal framework that Hong Kong currently utilises.

“Theoretically, yes it is reversible. But I think it would take something pretty substantial to roll this back,” he said.

Despite being the Head of the EU Office and noticing media censorship in the interviews he has given over the past four years, Gnocchi said he hasn’t gotten specific feedback from European journalists working in Hong Kong. Regardless, he emphasised that press freedom in Hong Kong is still a top concern for the EU.

“I think that the general realization that a thriving media environment — an environment where there’s true press freedom — I think that’s good for business and many organizations that rely on objective news and free information. Steps taken in that direction would be very, very welcomed,” he summarised.

On a positive note, Gnocchi also shared what he would miss about Hong Kong after he soon relocates to Japan. Food and nature were the first things that came to the outgoing ambassador’s mind.

“Well, the food has been a particular highlight — and spending time in the FCC. I’ve tried to balance the food by walking in the great country parks, which are just around the corner. That is something that I’ll really miss about Hong Kong – the fact that you have this international finance center and you walk two minutes and you’re in a country park. Certainly I’ll miss that a lot,” he said.

Despite this, Gnocchi also shared his excitement for the new range of cuisine that will be available to him once he reaches Tokyo.

“There’s good food in Japan, too. I’m not out of the woods yet!” he concluded.

Watch the full discussion between Morgan Davis and Thomas Gnocchi on our YouTube channel:

“An easy life does not always correspond to a good one.”

Standing at the FCC podium, Justice Richard Bernstein began his opening speech with stories of pain and triumph. Going to law school, becoming elected and re-elected to serve on Michigan’s Supreme Court, and completing multiple endurance races — all while being born visually impaired— has been no easy mission.

Despite such a life-altering setback, Justice Bernstein has chosen to persevere, to overcome the challenges he faces every day and become a leading figure in disability rights.

“Life is all about doing things because you’ve got to want it. You’ve got to believe in it. You’ve got to choose it, and you’ve got to decide that you’re going to make this happen,” he said.

Justice Bernstein, with the help of the US Consulate, completed a recent tour of Hong Kong. While meeting with consular staff, local radio stations and journalists — and even joining a run with Fearless Dragon, a running group for people with visual and hearing impairments — he also spoke at an FCC Club Lunch alongside President Lee Williamson.

The pair talked in depth about Justice Bernstein’s professional life and athletic career, as well as Michigan’s role in the upcoming US presidential elections and how voting systems can differ from state to state.

Williamson, as an avid runner himself, first asked Justice Bernstein about how he was able to complete 26 marathons and a full IronMan competition, which consists of a 2.4-mile swim followed by a 112-mile bike ride and another full marathon.

Justice Bernstein’s advice was simple — just take one step at a time.

“Ultimately, if you do everything one day at a time and one step at a time, things usually tend to find their way,” he said.

Williamson highlighted the New York City accident that Justice Bernstein suffered from before his 18th marathon. A cyclist struck him while going over 35 miles an hour, shattering his pelvis. The accident required 10 weeks of hospitalisation and left the justice with chronic pain, yet he still continued running.

“It [running] is something that you build over time. It becomes a part of what you do and who you are, and it becomes a part of your lifestyle, and it becomes part of what you tend to focus on each and every day. Like I always speak to, it becomes part of your life mission,” Justice Bernstein summarised.

Williamson and Justice Bernstein also discussed recent developments in US politics, starting with the attempted assassination of former president Donald Trump on July 13th. Justice Bernstein explained that the incident could potentially strengthen the energy and passion of both Trump and his dedicated supporters.

Justice Bernstein also briefly commented on the landmark Supreme Court ruling that grants Trump immunity for core presidential duties he conducted while in office during his alleged attempt to overturn the 2020 election results.

“If you create an environment where the president isn’t required to have to hear or to follow the rules that are set forth that everyone else has to follow, then what are the consequences of that?” Justice Bernstein asked.

He then added that the upcoming litigation against Trump will certainly continue for a long time, and that each new wave of litigation must be studied carefully to address all the nuances and degrees in which federal laws may or may not have been violated.

The conversation then transitioned into Justice Bernstein’s role in disability rights and lawmaking. As a Supreme Court Justice of Michigan, the cases he decides on can impact the rest of the country.

Justice Bernstein gave the example of how transportation is designed. Whether it’s an airline or a bus system, he finds that the accessibility of these modes of transportation need to be considered at conception. Mandates from US Congress or the Supreme Court could also be applied, yet Justice Bernstein clarified that most of the decisions that will affect everyday Americans will be done at the state court level.

These state and federal dynamics also came into play during Justice Bernstein’s experience with Michigan’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic.

With each state being able to determine how to use its own laws, resources, and police force to combat the pandemic, Justice Bernstein said the US Bill of Rights is ultimately the core consideration for how Michigan, or any other state, should implement new laws. What he found was that certain states created more restrictions than others during the pandemic, which treaded a careful line between protecting citizens and preserving the Bill of Rights. These decisions weren’t easy, yet they are precisely why Justice Bernstein believes that the courts are where they need to be made instead of by the executive or legislative branch.

“It’s really the job of the courts to be unpopular. It’s the job of the court to make decisions that people don’t like. And it’s the job of the courts to do things in difficult times that people really hate,” he said.

When asked if he would be willing to become a non-permanent overseas judge in Hong Kong if he were asked, Justice Bernstein gave a resounding yes.

“Absolutely! In our court, we have a lot of time off. We pretty much get July and August off, and also have February off. I would actually have the time to do it, and would be honoured to do it if asked,” he said.

Learn more about Justice Bernstein and his thoughts on the upcoming 2024 US elections by watching the full discussion on the FCC’s YouTube channel:

From 2020 to 2021, China took sweeping regulatory actions against their biggest tech players. The government canceled the IPO of Ant Group, Alibaba’s financial arm, and cracked down on the ride-sharing app Didi and online tutoring. To understand how these regulations affect the mainland economy and tech industry, the FCC held a panel discussion with three Chinese tech industry experts: HKU Law’s Angela Zhang, The Information’s Juro Osawa, and venture capitalist Michael Chow.

The three panellists sat alongside FCC Journalist Governor Joe Pan and shared their views on China’s changing regulatory landscape.

“What I have seen over the past several years is just so striking in that a lot of those things changed very quickly,” said Osawa when commenting on the seemingly overnight changes in mainland’s tech policies.

These actions shook Chinese stocks and caused investors (primarily from the US) to pull out and reinvest their money elsewhere. The dip in revenue was further exacerbated by China’s strict zero-Covid policies which further isolated the country’s finances from the rest of the world.

“This is kind of like a wakeup call for the top policy makers,” said Zhang.

As one of the leading academics in Hong Kong that specialises in antitrust law, Zhang found herself answering calls from journalists covering China’s tech crackdown after the Ant Group incident. Before then, she felt relatively anonymous and was quickly thrust into the media spotlight with appearances on Bloomberg and other financial news outlets.

Through further writing and research, most notably her latest book High Wire (2024), Zhang was able to summarise her model of China’s legal system, which functions as a three-part process where political hierarchy creates market volatility that leads to increased fragility across the entire techno-legal ecosystem.

“Very often, you’ll see [that] these regulatory measures were well-intentioned, but they generate a lot of side effects,” she explained.

Using this model, Zhang demonstrated how a feedback loop is created, leading to even more volatility and less accountability or confidence in China’s tech investment.

“It took a long time for the regulators or the top policy makers to realize the problem. By the time they address the problem, it’s often too late and that’s why I call the Chinese regulatory outcome tends to be very fragile,” she summarised.

Also, Zhang’s model has the capability to be applied to other areas besides technology.

As an experienced venture capital investor, Chow was asked by the panel if Zhang’s model can or has already been applied in his daily work. He noted the government’s continued efforts against corruption as the primary driver of market volatility — not the government’s rigid structure and control.

“Volatility comes whether there’s a hierarchy or not. I think it’s more to do with what’s happening in today’s China. I think it’s a lot to do with the corruption-fighting, and that’s why you see a lot of tightening of power. They don’t tend to give the so-called authority to the lower ranks anymore because of corruption,” Chow said.

Watch the full panel discussion on our YouTube channel:

As American society becomes more polarised over events such as the Israel-Hamas conflict and the 2024 US presidential election, Executive Editor Joe Kahn aims to continue producing well-rounded and fair journalism at The New York Times.

Kahn’s journalism career has spanned almost four decades now, with his most recent assignment being to guide and oversee all aspects of the Times’ global newsroom since 2022.

At an FCC fireside chat with President Lee Williamson, Kahn spoke about his humble beginnings as a local news reporter in Texas to becoming a China correspondent and eventually leading the Times — ultimately sharing how his career has shaped his philosophy on how the Times should handle the challenges that modern journalism faces.

A two-time Pulitzer winner, he embarked on his journalism journey at The Dallas Morning News in 1987 and subsequently took on the role of a China correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, a move that his career benefitted from in the long run despite not being apparent at the time.

“That was the bet that I made, and that was a pretty good bet. I wish I had some sort of monetary way of betting on China at that time, but for me, it paid off journalistically,” he said.

Kahn joined the Times in 1998 and has held positions in New York, Washington, and China. He has led the Times’ coverage of some of the world’s most complex events — wars in the Middle East, terrorism attacks and political turmoil in Europe, and much more.

Kahn’s tenure as a Managing Editor from 2016-2022 culminated in his appointment as Executive Editor two years ago. He described his current role as both executive and strategic, yet still highly focused on content.

“The word ‘Executive’ in the title is actually somewhat misleading. The tradition at The Times has always been for its top news editor to remain involved in daily content creation. The core product is the news that we’re covering, and its relevance, competitiveness and urgency are my main responsibility,” he said.

The importance of the 24-hour news cycle has altered the nature of day-to-day operations, and for Kahn, this means his day begins much earlier than it would have done in the print-only era.

“In those days, as an editor, you’d be heavily involved in presiding over the process of deciding which of the many stories we were covering would make the front page, and that process would load later in the day as journalists began completing their stories. It’s now very different and my day is very front-loaded, as we need to stay competitive, relevant and urgent,” he explained.

President Williamson touched upon the numerous global challenges currently facing newsrooms — continued economic headwinds, the war in Ukraine, the Israel-Hamas conflict, and fraying US-China and bilateral relations. Kahn acknowledged the finite resources available and the critical decision-making process that the Times endures when choosing what to cover.

“Even for a newsroom as well-equipped as The New York Times, we have daily, weekly, and monthly debates about what our top priorities are internationally, and we try to put resources behind all of the big issues. Most of them we will continue to invest in and produce a high level of coverage, even if we’re not getting direct feedback from readers.”

When asked about what he has learned after two years into the role, Kahn noted the sensitivity surrounding the subject of Israel, especially in the US.

“I guess I’ve never witnessed a global issue that has divided Americans as much as this particular one has. The tensions are evident even with our own staff. It’s just an incredibly divisive conflict and the ethnic issues around it are extremely polarising,” he said.

Kahn then elaborated on why the Times is hesitant to officially refer to the Israel-Hamas conflict as a “genocide”, unlike other news organisations and political figures/groups that have adopted the term.

“We don’t embrace that term. We can quote people as saying it, but we don’t, in our own words, label something. ‘Genocide’ is a legal term that has to be judged by international courts and even in the event that a particular situation is perceived to equate to that word, we wouldn’t necessarily use it ourselves,” he clarified.

Kahn cited former President Trump’s “misstatements” being officially described as “lies” in the Times’ reporting to demonstrate the necessary justifications in using such a term.

“That’s also a very high bar,” he began. “We use that term only in certain circumstances where he continuously repeated a known falsehood, like his allegation that former President Barack Obama wasn’t born in the United States. I think setting a high bar is the essence of the standards process.”

Commenting on the state of polarisation in the US, Kahn also said that despite such massive divides in American society, the Times has still developed a devout readership. 

“There is a curious center among readers who are still hungry for good quality, well-rounded, fair journalism on the issues that they care about. I think that’s why we’ve been able to continue to grow our readership and our subscriber base even during a time when people are seen as moving into these unbridgeable camps of public opinion.”

President Williamson also asked Kahn about his observations of a changing Hong Kong, and what he had surmised during his recent meetings with people across the spectrum of Hong Kong society.

“I’m somewhat encouraged by the tone of the discussions that we have had with some close China watchers who are trying to understand what’s happening across the border, and I think the essence of Hong Kong is still very much present,” he said.

With the increased risks and uncertainties for both local and international journalists operating in the region, Kahn acknowledged the challenges faced by media outlets, citing legal advice that has prompted the Times to reduce its presence and relocate some staff to Seoul.

Despite these challenges, the Times’ international print edition remains in Hong Kong, which consists of a small but dedicated number of journalists who continue to report on critical issues both within Hong Kong and across the border in Mainland China.

“The safety and protection of my journalists is my number one responsibility and we would throw all of our resources into a security issue, a safety issue, or a legal issue for any member of our staff who encounters difficulties of that kind… The types of issues that we’re facing here tend to be more long-term legal and bureaucratic and less about physical safety, but it is something we watch very closely,” he concluded.

The reporting for this article was a collaboration between Hugo Novales, the FCC’s in-house journalist, and Ann Tsang, Editor of FCC magazine The Correspondent. The print edition of this piece can be found in The Correspondent’s July 2024 issue. The full discussion can be watched on our YouTube channel: