As he embarks on a new TV channel and a free newspaper, the controversial media mogul behind Apple Daily Jimmy Lai has yet again sparked another circulation war in Hong Kong. Here he speaks exclusively about his masterplan

Words Shirley Zhao
Photography Calvin Sit

People love him, hailing him as a challenge to Chinese authority and Hong Kong’s last stand in support of democracy. People hate him, criticising him for promoting vulgar and often gutter-wallowing journalism, as well as pandering to an endless public appetite for gossip and scandal. His newspapers and magazines rank high in sensationalism yet high in circulation. It could be said he has driven Hong Kong into an ‘amusing ourselves to death’ era – and he never stops creating new, innovative ideas. Meet Jimmy Lai Chee-ying, the city’s rebellious media mogul.

At 63 years old, Lai isn’t showing any signs of slowing up. He’s making two more ambitious moves as we speak – a TV station and a free newspaper. And they’re bound to shake up the media world both here and in Taiwan. But, over the past two decades, Lai’s tumultuous effect on the industry is something he has become used to.

While the Guangdong-born mogul may have first made his mark in the world of fashion – founding Giordano in 1981 – it’s been in the media realm where his presence has been most acutely felt. Since launching Next Magazine in 1990, he’s brought a bold, aggressive, and at times viciously outspoken approach to the Hong Kong media landscape – a style epitomised by his flagship newspaper, Apple Daily, after it launched in 1995 (it’s now the city’s second largest paper, selling over 300,000 copies daily). Today, his empire encompasses not only Hong Kong, but an all-dominant share of Taiwan’s media market as well.

For Lai, innovation has always been the key to his success. Apple Daily ‘pioneered’ the use of massive graphics, bold headlines and full colour pages – now very much the template for many papers in Hong Kong and Taiwan – and he’s also led a controversial path into the world of animated news. Even today he continues to push the envelope, with his new forays into TV and free newspapers. Lai, of course, is all too aware of the changing landscape of Asia’s modern media, but with what he calls this ‘new medium’, he thinks he’s onto a recipe for success – a point he’s eager to reinforce from the outset with Time Out...

Mr Lai, you’ve just launched Sharp Daily. But previously you said you didn’t want to publish free newspapers. What changed your mind?
If you look at Sharp Daily in the context of new media, we needed to do it. In recent years, traditional newspapers have been unavoidably shrinking. At the same time, we feel it is promising to combine a free newspaper with new media. First, when you buy a traditional newspaper, it is you reaching out to the paper only when you feel the need. But free newspapers reach out to readers with or without the need. It makes a huge difference. Second, a free newspaper like Sharp Daily, which employs both video and audio, enables readers to read news and features, watch video and listen to audio with a click on their cell phones. I feel it will be interesting to make free newspapers a multimedia platform. It will become a new medium. A new medium, with constant, timely changes, will have great potential. Especially now, when cell phones are wildly popular, the availability of both video and audio on a newspaper will greatly change the definition of newspaper itself.

You’ve always been a pioneer in the city’s media industry but you’ve made the move into free newspapers quite late. Why now?
Without the popularity of cell phones providing us with a platform for a new medium, we might not have decided to launch a free newspaper. Others have been doing free newspapers for years and are very successful. But the most important thing is that our free newspaper is totally different to others. Not only is it a new medium with visual and sound elements, it’s also different in its packaging and style.

So although you’re late, you feel you’ve been innovative?
Yes. We will only do something when we think it has room for innovation. I saw little room for innovation at the start, by simply turning paid newspapers unpaid and adjusting the lengths and depths of the articles.

You’re often praised for your shrewd instincts. Did you follow your instinct this time?
I think instinct is one of the reasons. But the most important reason is that we see the media industry in the midst of an overwhelming revolution. The popularity of cell phones is unprecedentedly changing every medium. Now is only the start for us.

Some people say the pro-democracy camp needs Sharp Daily to fight the very popular pro-establishment Headline Daily. What do you think of this?
That won’t be our consideration. We are doing this paper in consideration of the market, the needs of society and the development of technology. We won’t emphasise politics. If you want to publish more than a million copies of a paper, the tone of it has to be light. If it is too political, it will become too serious. We want to do a light-hearted paper.

So what political stand will Sharp Daily take?
When it comes to important issues, it will be on the citizens’ side. But generally we care more about citizens’ feelings of the city, their lives and spending.

With its target circulation of one million, there must be concern that Sharp Daily will eat into the Apple Daily readership. Why should readers keep buying Apple?
I believe it’s different. For example, Sharp Daily will be light-hearted and aimed at young people. Many young people today don’t read newspapers at all. So it won’t have much effect on Apple. It certainly will have effect, but not that much. It will be more about local people’s lives, gossip, their spending and information they need to lead their lives. Apple, more or less, will involve bigger issues, even politics.

Is it safe to say the purpose of launching Sharp Daily is to make money?
Yes, of course.

So if Sharp Daily earns a lot of cash, will you turn Apple into a more serious-minded newspaper?
We don’t know. Sharp Daily’s launch will directly affect the survival of Apple and other newspapers, so everyone will need to adjust to the new environment. We won’t know until we figure out what is required to adjust to the new environment.

Headline Daily recently ran an advert saying its circulation is four times that of Apple’s and…
[Interrupting] Not four times. Theirs is 800,000, and ours is a little more than 300,000.

...Okay. The advert also said Headline Daily is taking away Apple’s advertising market. How would you respond?
That’s why we’re launching Sharp Daily. [Laughs]

So Sharp Daily is…
[Serious tone] No, not really. We do it because we think it’s the right time. I don’t even know that ad.

Really? Okay, so now that you know it, how do you respond?
We don’t have to respond. We need readers to respond, which is the most important thing, not our competitors. They mean nothing to us.

What’s your philosophy on newspapers?
First, it’s the pursuit of truth. Second, you can’t go beyond the values and norm of the society. Third, you should protect the freedom of the society. The media should pursue what citizens pursue, like common values, democracy and freedom.

What about exaggeration of the facts? Does the pursuit of truth – or news – justify the means?
It would be illegal to let the ends justify the means. You can’t do that on any occasion. In terms of exaggeration, if I’m on the opposite side, I’ll think whatever you say is exaggeration, because I don’t agree with you. It depends on the different stances of different people.

But sometimes they don’t have to be illegal means; they can be extreme means which are difficult for the common reader to accept. Do you think that can be justified?
If you employ means that are difficult to be accepted, readers will be disgusted by you. You won’t do [the business] well. I think it’s not okay.

Why did you decide to start a TV station?
I feel newspapers are already a sunset industry. The future of the world is a visual one. Young people have been watching TV, playing games, watching cartoons since they were born. They’ve grown up in an image world. It’s unavoidable that the world will be visual in the future, so I decided to start a visual medium.

Apple Daily has become known for its animated news. But most people think animated news distorts facts, misleads the audience, and isn’t worthy of serious attention. What do you think?
I think many people don’t really understand many new things. They just suddenly react to a new move, a new medium. Those reactions may not always be based on facts. They will think it acceptable after they get used to it.

Yes, but when making animated news, producers often ‘imagine’ details that may not, in fact, have been real...
But those details will not affect the news itself or cause ethical problems. For example, now I’m talking with you. The animated news may make this table square instead of round, but as long as the content of our conversation is correct, it won’t affect the correctness of the news. We have a lot of background information when doing newspapers. Now we are just animating this information. It doesn’t make any difference. But to ordinary people, the impact is greater, so they have a very sudden or natural reaction toward this new thing without thinking it through. It needs a long time to truly understand this.

Sometimes your animated news includes explicit content, violence, bloodshed, etc. Do you have an endzone for such content?
Many people are watching animated news now. Our animated news gets 800 hits a day. If you watch them, you will know we don’t show things that are relatively violent or explicit. We are subtle [on this content].

Do you have a system to censor this content?
No. We do animated news while detecting the needs of the market.

Let’s go back. Why did you start a media company when you were still a clothing retailer.
Tiananmen Square. I participated in the event and thought that would be the beginning of China’s opening up, and media would be the biggest participant.

So where does China’s media stand today?
It’s still under censorship.

Then how could it be changed?
Who knows? Nobody knows.
You must have some insight on this matter.
It’s difficult to be changed. Only a right time can change it.

When is that right time?
When China becomes more and more open, when the world and its common values have greater influence on China, and when everyone requires more freedom, democracy and law, and justice. China has to change.

Have you seen any sign of such a change?
I think China is gradually changing in a good direction. No matter how China controls and censors, people’s command is definitely greater.

You wrote letters criticising certain Chinese leaders, but it’s been a long time since your last outburst. Are you still brave and fierce?
I think I’m still holding fast to my beliefs and I will continue doing newspapers in this stand. But people grow old and their attitudes will change. You won’t be as fierce as you used to be.

Do you now think this new attitude might bring about a better result?
I won’t think of it, because first there’s no way to do it all over again, and second I don’t think I did it wrong. You mean whether I regret? I don’t regret.

Nowadays most people are saying Hong Kong has less freedom of speech.
I don’t think so.

Why not?
Apple Daily is not censored.

Yes but there’s less freedom than before.
I don’t think so.

Okay, people also say the Hong Kong government is under tighter control from the Central Government and becoming a ‘provincial government’. What do you think of that?
I think everyone knows that it has been under control since day one [of the handover]. It’s no surprise. It’s also unavoidable that the Chinese government’s ideology will affect Hong Kong and even Hong Kong’s government.

Is that bad news for Hong Kong?
Of course it’s bad, but you can’t help.

Will there be a good side?
A good side, well… the Mainland won’t focus on us that much, and won’t send many people here and make the situation so intense. But, in the long term, it’s definitely bad for us, making Hong Kong lose its own quality, its ideology, as a successful international city, of freedom and common values. I think Hong Kong people need to wake up and stick to our own values.

Do you think Hongkongers, by sticking to their values, can change the status quo?
Hong Kong people have been standing on a more solid ground, and the ‘post-80s’ generation has also realised that they need to have their beliefs and let their voice be heard. I think Hong Kong people will keep doing this.

Earlier this year, in an interview with RTHK, you said if mainland China allowed you in, you would do a New York Times-type of newspaper there…
I never said this.

But I watched it.
I never said this.

Okay, then if the Mainland did open its doors to you, would you go there to do a New York Times or another Apple Daily?
I’ll still do Apple. I won’t do New York Times.

Why not?
It would be impossible [to do New York Times] in terms of talent and needs of the society, which haven’t reached the level.

Do you want to do media in the Mainland?
It’s meaningless whether I want to. What’s the use to want to do something if it’s impossible?

You mean the Chinese media environment is not suitable for someone like you?
Of course not. There’s so much control.

What do you think are the differences between Mainland, Hong Kong and Taiwan audiences?
I think in the end what they want would be more or less the same. You can exclude the Mainland, because you won’t get what you want. Hong Kong and Taiwan audiences can basically have what they want.

And what do they want?
What they need [is] to lead their lives. To know what is happening. To have access to information that enables them to live more conveniently.

Have you ever considered other media markets overseas?
No.

Why not?
Media is local. You can’t do it wherever you want. Each place has its own culture, customs, values and habits, which are very local. A newspaper is to resonate with people, to include a city’s own issues. Those things are not like in a book — that you can understand them after you read it — you have to feel them. I can’t do it [overseas].

What do you think of Vice Premier Li Keqiang’s visit to the University of Hong Kong and the conflict between student protesters and the police it caused?
I think [getting police to secure the campus and separating protesters] was what Li Keqiang needed. He is going to be promoted and he didn’t want to face situations that might embarrass him, or where he didn’t know how to respond or what his responses might cause. Another reason may be that the Hong Kong government felt too nervous. After all, the Hong Kong government made an unwise move by embarrassing the whole society for a leader’s visit. I think [the government] knew that it was an unwise move.

Do you have a prediction for our next Chief Executive?
No, I don’t have one.

We’re certain it’s Henry Tang. What are your expectations on the current candidates?
I don’t have any expectations. After all, it’s up to the Chinese government to choose one.

So whoever takes the position, the result will be the same?
[Pause] Not necessarily. But I won’t think about it. Why would we think about it if we can’t choose?