Search
“Masyarakat menganggap masalah ini remeh. Mereka terbiasa dengan keadaan sekeliling yang terdapat ramai orang mengalami berlebihan berat badan.”
Betul ke? Jom sama-sama turunkan berat badan, nak?🏋🏽
https://www.bharian.com.my/rencana/minda-pembaca/2021/02/785500/atasi-obesiti-agenda-pbb-demi-kemakmuran-dunia
【台灣防疫成效 #國際政要 都肯定👍👍👍】
第二波移入疫情強勢回流 🌀
看到確診人數增加
相信有在追指揮中心記者會的大家
內心不免七上八下
但只要我們 #謹慎應對 持續落實 #防疫工作
相信還是有機會守住J一波‼️
雖然還是會擔心
但蒐集癖小編決定要再發一篇落落長的文
讓各位看看世界各國的政要大咖
如何讚 #台灣 目前為止的防疫模式 👏👏👏
#我們不害怕雨淋
#因為我們知道大雨之後會有彩虹 🌈
#團結一心 #正向防疫
#台灣加油 💪
As the coronavirus pandemic continues, we'll endeavour to remain prudent in our epidemic prevention measures. We believe we can stem the tide.
To reinstill some confidence, we've collected a series of quotes from politicians and ministers around the world, praising the #TaiwanModel as part of the fight against the #COVID19 #WuhanCoronavirus. Read what they had to say below!
《亞太地區》
#紐西蘭 New Zealand 🇳🇿
3/15 ─ 紐西蘭總理阿爾登：「我們將緊密遵循相當接近於台灣的模式，他們(台灣政府)針對公眾集會所建立的因應架構，是相當成功的。我們將以它為根據，來設定我們的標準。」
March 15 - Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said, in a Q+A interview on Sunday, that officials were looking at tailored criteria for events that may need to be cancelled, such as whether people would be in close proximity to one another.
“We're going to follow, pretty closely, the Taiwanese model. They worked up a framework for mass gatherings that's been quite successful,” she said.
#日本 Japan 🇯🇵
3/12 ─ 日本台灣交流協會代表泉裕泰：「我相信台灣的真知灼見可與世界各國廣泛共享，並對苦於遭受傳染蔓延的其他國家與地區做出巨大的貢獻。」
March 12 - Japan's chief representative in Taiwan, Hiroyasu Izumi, stated that he believes Taiwan's insights can be widely shared with other countries in the world and make great contributions to other countries and regions suffering from the spread of infection.
《亞非地區》
#以色列 Israel 🇮🇱
3/14 ─ 以色列總理尼坦雅胡：「順帶一提，這個方法已經在台灣試過了，可能很成功。以色列是少數國家當中，有這個能力做的。我們將採用這個方法。」
March 14 - Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said it was not an easy choice to make and described the virus as an “invisible enemy that must be located.” He said Israel would follow similar methods used by Taiwan.
3/14 ─ 以色列前總理巴拉克：「以色列可以對抗新冠病毒，但必須像台灣一樣反應快速。」
March 14 - Former prime minister Ehud Barak stated that Israel can fight against the novel coronovirus, but that it must react as swiftly as Taiwan.
《拉美地區》
#尼加拉瓜 Nicaragua🇳🇮
3/11 ─ 尼加拉瓜副總統穆麗優：「我們得知台灣政府及人民實行了成功的防疫模式，我們已向台灣駐尼大使提出請求，期盼台灣與我們分享經驗，因為台灣不僅成功防制傳染，且維持人民秩序免於慌亂，確實值得學習。」
March 11 - La vicepresidenta de Nicaragua, Rosario Murillo, declaró: "Nosotros hemos conocido el Modelo exitoso de contención que puso en práctica el Gobierno y el Pueblo de la República de China(Taiwán), y hemos pedido a su Embajador aquí, que nos presenten ese Modelo exitoso, porque han logrado no solo contener, sino también mantener a la población en un estado que no esté de pánico." (The vice president of Nicaragua, Rosario Murillo, stated, "We are aware of the successful model of prevention that the government and the people of Taiwan have put into practice, and we've asked the Taiwanese ambassador to make a presentation on this successful model, because they've not only managed to contain the virus, but they've kept their population from panicking.")
#聖文森 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines🇻🇨
3/12 ─ 聖文森衛生部長布朗：「台灣因『一個中國』原則不被承認為獨立國家，因此未被納入參與「世界衛生大會」（WHA），台灣距離中國僅為海峽之隔，然而疫情爆發至今卻僅有少數確診病例，我已正式致函何大使尋求台灣的協助以對抗聖國疫情。」
March 12 - "It’s quite remarkable that they’re just 81 miles from mainland China and whereas coronavirus in mainland China has been spiralling out of control...That’s incredible,” Health minister Luke Brown said. Taiwan is not a part of the World Health Assembly as it is not recognised as being an independent country under the One-China policy. Browne said the ambassador has mentioned some of the measures that Taiwan has taken, some of which he believes will work in the Vincentian context while others may not.
#聖露西亞 Saint Lucia🇱🇨
3/11 ─ 聖露西亞衛生部長艾瑟柯：「目前全球正共同對抗來自中國武漢的新型冠狀病毒，聖露西亞政府藉此機會讚許臺灣採取有效率且具成效的防疫措施，並提議與露國緊密合作防疫。」
March 11 - “As the world is fighting the COVID-19 Coronavirus originated from Wuhan, China, the Government of Saint Lucia wishes to take this opportunity to commend Taiwan for its efficient and efficacious measures, and its offer to work closely with Saint Lucia to contain the pandemic,” said Health Minister Mary Isaac.
#貝里斯 Belize🇧🇿
2/4 ─ 貝里斯衛生部長馬林：「貝國政府及衛生部肯定台灣關鍵的公衛措施，包括對隔離案例進行電子監控、口罩及其他物資供應，強化防疫工作。」
Feb. 4 - Minister of Health, Hon. Pablo Marin: “The Government of Belize, and by extension the Ministry of Health, applauds Taiwan’s key public health measures that include electronic monitoring of quarantined cases and the provision of masks and other items to support the prevention efforts.”
#巴拉圭 Paraguay🇵🇾
3/17 ─ 巴拉圭參議員法切提：「儘管與WHO無任何合作關係，台灣仍向前行…台灣也因此能夠成功防堵新冠病毒。」
March 17 - Fernando Silva Facetti, Paraguayan politician: "A PESAR DE LA NULA COOPERACIÓN DE LA @opsoms, #TAIWAN SIGUE ADELANTE... Así es como Taiwán logró contener el brote de #coronavirus" (Despite the lack of cooperation from the WHO, Taiwan continues to progress... This is how Taiwan managed to contain the coronavirus.)
#委內瑞拉 Venezuela🇻🇪
3/13 ─ 委內瑞拉臨時政府代表楊杰斯議員：「感謝情同手足的台灣人民贈交我們防疫所需的口罩及酒精。Taiwan Can Help！」
March 13 - Jesús M. Yánez M., Venezuelan politician: "Gracias a el hermano pueblo de Taiwan nos encontramos entregando tapa boca y kits de alcohol, denunciando la falta de prevención y de medidas acordes contra el COVIDー19 Taiwan Can Help" (Thanks to our brothers and sisters in Taiwan, we find ourselves with face masks and alcohol kits, denouncing the lack of prevention and appropriate measures against COVID-19. Taiwan Can Help.)
3/15 ─ 委內瑞拉駐西班牙大使艾卡利：「台灣及早警覺，並已阻擋了疫情擴散。」
March 15 - Antonio Ecarri B., Ambassador of Venezuela in Spain: "Taiwan se alarmó y frenó su expansión." (Taiwan was alarmed and curbed the spread.)
#阿根廷 Argentina 🇦🇷
3/11 ─ 阿根廷國會議員康帕紐利：「台灣是成功控制疫情的模範。」
March 11 - Marcela Campagnoli, National Deputy in Argentina: "Taiwan es un ejemplo de como lo han controlado." (Taiwan is an example of how to control it.)
3/16 ─ 阿根廷國際關係委員會秘書長桑提巴聶茲：「認為威權政府防疫工作做得比民主國家好，這個想法是錯的。台灣、韓國及新加坡做得非常好，他們都是民主國家。」
March 16 - Francisco de Santibañes, Secretary General of the Argentine Council for International Relations: "Sería un error pensar que los gobiernos autoritarios actuaron mejor que las democracias a la hora de controlar el coronavirus. Corea del Sur, Singapur y Taiwán lo hicieron muy bien y son democracias." (It would be a mistake to think that authoritarian governments act better than democracies in curbing the coronavirus. South Korea, Singapore and Taiwan did it very well and they're democracies.)
#哥倫比亞 Colombia🇨🇴
3/12 ─ 哥倫比亞內科醫師學會前主席希尼爾：「看看台灣，從全球確診統計圖表中漸漸消失，並對照其他亞洲國家防疫進展。他們比其他國家聰明嗎？不，是因為他們比較有組織、守紀律！」
March 12 - Juan Senior, ex-president of the Colombian Association of Internal Medicine: "Miren la evolución de Taiwán, desaparece del panorama y como evoluciona la epidemia en países asiáticos. Son más inteligentes que todos? No, son más organizados y disciplinados!!!" (Look how things have gone in Taiwan, they're out of the picture now and how the epidemic has developed in asian countries. Are they smarter than everyone else? No, they're more organized and more disciplined!!!)
#巴拿馬 Panama 🇵🇦
3/11 ─ 巴拿馬前駐台大使馬締斯：「台灣向世界展現，他們運用2003年抗煞所學到的經驗，準備好對抗新冠疫情。」
March 11 - Dr. Alfredo Martiz, former Ambassador of Panama in Taiwan: "Lo que Taiwán puede enseñar al mundo sobre la lucha contra el coronavirus Análisis: Taiwán aprovechó las lecciones aprendidas durante el brote de SARS de 2003, y esta vez su gobierno y su pueblo estaban preparados" (What Taiwan can teach the world about the fight against the coronavirus. Analysis: Taiwan took the lessons learned during the SARS outbreak of 2003 and this time its government and its people were ready.)
《歐洲》
#捷克 Czech Republic🇨🇿
3/15 ─ 捷克總理巴比斯：「政府決定改變中央危機應變中心的定位及人員調度，仿照如同媒體所報導台灣的因應做法。」 March 15 - Prime Minister Andrej Babis: “The government decided to change the status of the Central Crisis Staff, where the crisis staff will be modeled, as we read in the media and it was in Taiwan.”
#丹麥 Denmark🇩🇰
3/18 ─ 丹麥前總理拉斯穆森：「台灣利用大數據、透明、由中央指揮的防疫作為奏效，值得世界各國學習。現在是時候告訴中國，確有地方可以討論地緣政治的，但不是在世界衛生組織。」 March 18 - In his March 18 piece in Time Magazine, former prime minister of Denmark Anders Fogh Rasmussen, stated "After the first notifications at the end of 2019, Taipei swiftly deployed a combination of measures to identify and contain the virus, including the use of big data to help contain potential cases."
#法國 France🇫🇷
3/5 ─ 前法國衛生部長及外交部長杜斯特：「檢視中央集權與非中央集權國家決策模式的差異十分有意思。台灣雖緊鄰中國卻可能是受武漢肺炎死亡率最低及受影響最輕的國家，其防疫成果完全令人難以置信，是為出色的危機管理。」
March 5 - Former French health and foreign minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said, "Ce qui est très intéressant en regardant les différents pays, c’est la centralisation ou la non-centralisation des décisions. Et on s’aperçoit que par exemple Taiwan est probablement le pays où il y a le moins de létalité et le pays le moins touché alors que c’est extrêmement près de la Chine. Le résultat est absolument invraisemblable. C’est une magnifique gestion de crise." (What is quite interesting with different countries, is centralization vs non-centralization of decisions. And one realizes that, for example, Taiwan is probably the country where the mortality rate is the lowest and the least affected country despite its extreme proximity to China. The result is absolutely implausible. It’s wonderful crisis management.)
3/7 ─ 法國國民議會友臺小組主席瑟賽希尼：「臺灣是處理武漢肺炎疫情的典範。」
March 7 - The chair of the French National Assembly's France-Taiwan Parliamentary Friendship Group, Jean François Cesarini, stated "Taïwan : Exemplaire dans sa gestion de l’épidémie du Coronavirus." (Taiwan: an excellent model for the management of the coronavirus epidemic.)
3/6 ─ 法國國民議會友臺小組副主席拉赫迪耶：「臺灣堪稱處理武漢肺炎危機的典範。」
March 6 - The deputy chair of the French National Assembly's France-Taiwan Parliamentary Friendship Group, Laure de La Raudière, stated "Gestion exemplaire de Taiwan de la crise du Coronavirus." (Taiwan's exemplary management of the coronavirus crisis.)
#義大利 Italy🇮🇹
3/16 ─ 義大利前外交部長德爾其：「台灣可能是第一個向WHO報告新冠病毒人傳人的國家，而且早在中國和WHO承認之前。顯然地，台灣因為北京施壓，被排除在世衛組織之外已有兩年之久。」
March 16 - Former foreign minister, Giulio Terzi: "Taiwan potrebber esser stato primo Paese a comunicare alla OMS che coronavirus COVID19 si stava trasmettendo da uomo a uomo.Molto prima che Cina e OMS lo ammettessero. Ovviamente, per volere Pechino, Taipei subisce esclusione da OMS da due anni." (Taiwan may have been the first country to report to WHO that coronavirus COVID19 was spreading from amongst humans, long before China and WHO admitted it. Obviously, at the behest of Beijing, Taipei has been excluded from WHO for two years.)
3/19 ─ 義大利北聯黨外交事務首席法拉利，轉推蔡總統「台美簽署防疫聯合夥伴關係聲明」推文：「這是向中國，也是向世界傳達的重要訊息。」
March 19: Lega Nord head of foreign affairs in Lombardy, Max Ferrari: "Coronavirus. Importante messaggio alla Cina e al mondo da Taiwan e Usa." (Coronavirus. Important message to China and the world from Taiwan and the USA.)
#歐盟 EU🇪🇺
3/14 ─ 歐洲議會議員暨中國關係代表團團長包瑞翰：「在這次疫情危機中，台灣在拯救生命方面做得很好。為什麼不邀請他們充分參與國際呢？ 為什麼WHO不這樣做？因為北京玩弄民族主義政治，犧牲人民的利益。」
March 14 - “Taiwan is doing a great job with saving lives in this corona crisis. Why not acknowledge that and invite them to participate fully in international efforts? Why doesn't WHO do it? Because Beijing is playing nationalist politics at people's expense,” said Reinhard Bütikofer
#英國 UK 🇬🇧
3/13 ─ 英國前衛生大臣杭特表示，政府應採取更積極的行動，包括禁止探視養老院的長者。他認為，英國應該像是泰國和台灣等已控制住疫情的國家一樣，採取行動。
March 13 - Jeremy Hunt, the UK former health secretary: "Countries like Thailand and Taiwan had controlled the outbreak by taking such action. People will be concerned we are not moving sooner on social distancing."
#瑞典 Sweden🇸🇪
2/18 ─ 瑞典國會議員溫和黨主席席德斐：「從長遠來看，世衛組織不願將台灣納入扼止新冠病毒傳播及由該病毒所引起的傳播的任務，是完全站不住腳的，並且從很多面向來看是適得其反，例如從醫學和經濟角度。」
Feb. 18 - Moderate Party MP Margareta Cederfelt pointed out that “WHO’s unwillingness to include Taiwan in its work with limiting the spread of the coronavirus and stopping infections caused by the virus in the long-run, is indefensible and counterproductive seen from several perspectives, for example from a medical and economic perspective.”
#德國 Germany🇩🇪
3/13 ─ 德國自民黨主席國會議員布本多弗：「有一個國家在抗疫上脫穎而出，運用明確的策略及冷靜的態度有效對抗新冠肺炎，這個國家就是臺灣。」
March 13 - Chair of the district association Mühldorf am Inn of the FDP Bavaria Sandra Maria Bubendorfe: "Bei meiner 3. Rede im Deutschen Bundestag zum Thema Zivil und Katastrophenschutz in Deutschland vergangen Freitag, war es mir ein besonderes Bedürfnis Taiwan hervorzuheben, das gezeigt hat wie man mit klaren Strategien und kühlen Kopf auf die Gefahr des Corona Virus antworten kann und damit die Ausbreitung deutlich erschwert und verlangsamt wird." (During my third speech in the German Bundestag on civil and civil protection in Germany last Friday, I felt a need to highlight Taiwan, which showed how to respond to the dangers of the coronavirus with a clear strategy and a cool head, and thus significantly slowed its spread.)
#荷蘭 The Netherlands🇳🇱
3/18 ─ 荷蘭前中央銀行主席維林克：「臺灣防疫預警作為，是這個擁有約2400萬居民，且每年接受約300萬中國旅客往訪的國家，迄今得以有效控制疫情的關鍵作為。」
March 18 - The former head of the Dutch central bank stated that with its 24 million strong population and 3 million annual tourists from China, Taiwan has unrolled effective key measures to curb the spread of the epidemic.
3/18 ─ 荷蘭50 Plus黨眾議員兼主席克羅及民主論壇黨眾議員兼主席伯德特：「台灣是成功例子」 無黨籍眾議員哈加：「台灣大量檢測與居家隔離，成功控制疫情，為何荷蘭不學習？」
March 18 - The leaders of the 50PLUS party and the Forum for Democracy, Henk Krol and Thierry Beaudet, stated that Taiwan has provided a successful model. Independent Dutch MP Wybren van Haga stated that Taiwan has been testing on a large scale and enforcing home quarantines, successful measures in curbing the epidemic and asked why the Netherlands wasn't learning from their example.
#瑞士 Switzerland 🇨🇭
3/10 ─ 瑞士國會下議員瓦爾德：「臺灣對抗新冠病毒具特別成效。」 March 10 - Swiss National Councillor Nicolas Walder said Taiwan's response to the novel coronavirus has been particularly effective.
#葡萄牙 Portugal🇵🇹
3/15 ─ 葡萄牙前人民黨黨揆暨資深媒體評論家波塔斯：「台灣承襲2003年對抗SARS經驗，成功壓抑疫情曲線峰值，值得葡國作為借鏡。」
March 15 - Former Deputy Prime Minister of Portugal and media personality Paulo Portas stated that Taiwan's experience in fighting SARS in 2003 allowed it to be successful in flattening the curve, providing a model Portugal can learn from.
3/18 ─ 葡萄牙國會友臺小組歐利維拉：「台灣病例出現雖早，卻在努力下獲得很好的控制，台灣防疫措施值得肯定及學習。」
March 18 - Chair of the Portugal-Taiwan Parliamentary Friendship Group Paulo Rios de Oliveira stated that although cases in Taiwan started to appear quite early on, they've controlled it very well with a lot of effort. Taiwan's epidemic control measures should be praised and studied.
#西班牙 Spain🇪🇸
3/13 ─ 西班牙前國會議員瓦紐費瑞：「這些措施證明台灣公衛模式有效，包括世界上最先進的醫衛系統、自2003年抗煞以來所累積的廣泛防疫經驗等。」
March 13 - Francisco Vañó Ferre, a former member of the Spanish Parliament: "Estas y otras medidas prueban la eficacia del modelo sanitario de Taiwán, que cuenta con uno de los más avanzados sistemas de salud del mundo y con amplia experiencia en la lucha contra enfermedades contagiosas tras haber sufrido la epidemia del SARS en 2003." (These and other measures prove the efficacy of the health model of Taiwan, which has one of the most advanced health systems in the world and a wealth of experience in the fight against contagious diseases, after having suffered from the SARS epidemic in 2003.)
#匈牙利 Hungary🇭🇺
3/15 ─ 匈牙利醫師學會：「在中國其他省份和其他亞洲國家，例如台灣和新加坡等，已經能夠預防感染的傳播。」
March 15 - The Hungarian Medical Chamber stated “In other provinces of China and other Asian countries (eg Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore) have been able to prevent the spread of the infection.”
北美：
#美國 US🇺🇸
2/5 ─ 美國前衛生部長派司：「台灣已經證明其防疫行動極為負責且透明，特別是在醫學和科學領域。最近有幸到訪台灣，台灣協助研發疫苗或以其他方式協助拯救生命，並促進人類對抗病毒的能力及情報，此刻尤顯出色。」
Feb. 5 – US former secretary of health and human services Tom Price: "Taiwan has shown itself to be extremely responsible and transparent in its actions, especially in the area of medicine and science. Having had the privilege of visiting recently, the capacity of Taiwan to help formulate a vaccine or assist in other ways to help save lives and advance human engagement and intelligence at this time is remarkable."
#加拿大 Canada🇨🇦
3/6 ─ 加拿大前國務部長契爾格：「將台灣排除在世衛組織之外，會讓新冠病毒對其國民和世界其他地區變得更加危險。」
March 6 - Canadian former secretary of state David Kilgour: “Excluding Taiwan from contact with WHO makes COVID-19 more dangerous for its nationals and the rest of the world.”
根據計算，100萬人遊行隊伍要從維多利亞公園排到廣東；200萬人遊行則要排到泰國。
順道一提香港15～30歲人口約莫100出頭萬人。以照片人群幾乎都是此年齡帶來看，兩個數字都是明顯誇大太多了。
另一個可以參考的是1969年的Woodstock Music & Art Fair，幾天內湧進40萬人次，照片看起來也是滿山滿谷的人。（http://sites.psu.edu/…/upl…/sites/851/2013/01/Woodstock3.jpg）
當年40萬人次引發驚人的大塞車，幾乎花十幾個小時才逐漸清場。
而香港遊行清場速度明顯快得多。
順道一提，因此運動而認定「你的父母不愛你」的白痴論述也如同文化大革命時的「爹親娘親不如毛主席親」般開始出現：
https://www.facebook.com/SaluteToHKPolice/videos/350606498983830/UzpfSTUyNzM2NjA3MzoxMDE1NjMyMTM4NjY3MTA3NA/
EVERY MAJOR NEWS outlet in the world is reporting that two million people, well over a quarter of our population, joined a single protest.
.
It’s an astonishing thought that filled an enthusiastic old marcher like me with pride. Unfortunately, it’s almost certainly not true.
.
A march of two million people would fill a street that was 58 kilometers long, starting at Victoria Park in Hong Kong and ending in Tanglangshan Country Park in Guangdong, according to one standard crowd estimation technique.
.
If the two million of us stood in a queue, we’d stretch 914 kilometers (568 miles), from Victoria Park to Thailand. Even if all of us marched in a regiment 25 people abreast, our troop would stretch towards the Chinese border.
.
Yes, there was a very large number of us there. But getting key facts wrong helps nobody. Indeed, it could hurt the protesters more than anyone.
.
For math geeks only, here’s a discussion of the actual numbers that I hope will interest you whatever your political views.
.
.
DO NUMBERS MATTER?
.
People have repeatedly asked me to find out “the real number” of people at the recent mass rallies in Hong Kong.
.
I declined for an obvious reason: There was a huge number of us. What does it matter whether it was hundreds of thousands or a million? That’s not important.
.
But my critics pointed out that the word “million” is right at the top of almost every report about the marches. Clearly it IS important.
.
.
FIRST, THE SCIENCE
.
In the west, drone photography is analyzed to estimate crowd sizes.
.
This reporter apologizes for not having found a comprehensive database of drone images of the Hong Kong protests.
.
But we can still use related methods, such as density checks, crowd-flow data and impact assessments. Universities which have gathered Hong Kong protest march data using scientific methods include Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, University of Hong Kong, and Hong Kong Baptist University.
.
.
DENSITY CHECKS
.
Figures gathered in the past by Hong Kong Polytechnic specialists using satellite photo analysis found a density level of one square meter per marcher. Modern analysis suggests this remains roughly accurate.
.
I know from experience that Hong Kong marches feature long periods of normal spacing (one square meter or one and half per person, walking) and shorter periods of tight spacing (half a square meter or less per person, mostly standing).
.
.
JOINERS AND SPEED
.
We need to include people who join halfway. In the past, a Hong Kong University analysis using visual counting methods cross-referenced with one-on-one interviews indicated that estimates should be boosted by 12% to accurately reflect late joiners. These days, we’re much more generous in estimating joiners.
.
As for speed, a Hong Kong Baptist University survey once found a passing rate of 4,000 marchers every ten minutes.
.
Videos of the recent rallies indicates that joiner numbers and stop-start progress were highly erratic and difficult to calculate with any degree of certainty.
.
.
DISTANCE MULTIPLIED BY DENSITY
.
But scientists have other tools. We know the walking distance between Victoria Park and Tamar Park is 2.9 kilometers. Although there was overspill, the bulk of the marchers went along Hennessy Road in Wan Chai, which is about 25 meters (or 82 feet) wide, and similar connected roads, some wider, some narrower.
.
Steve Doig, a specialist in crowd analysis approached by the Columbia Journalism Review (CJR), analyzed an image of Hong Kong marchers to find a density level of 7,000 people in a 210-meter space. Although he emphasizes that crowd estimates are never an exact science, that figure means one million Hong Kong marchers would need a street 18.6 miles long – which is 29 kilometers.
.
Extrapolating these figures for the June 16 claim of two million marchers, you’d need a street 58 kilometers long.
.
Could this problem be explained away by the turnover rate of Hong Kong marchers, which likely allowed the main (three kilometer) route to be filled more than once?
.
The answer is yes, to some extent. But the crowd would have to be moving very fast to refill the space a great many times over in a single afternoon and evening. It wasn’t. While I can walk the distance from Victoria Park to Tamar in 41 minutes on a quiet holiday afternoon, doing the same thing during a march takes many hours.
.
More believable: There was a huge number of us, but not a million, and certainly not two million.
.
.
IMPACT MEASUREMENTS
.
A second, parallel way of analyzing the size of the crowd is to seek evidence of the effects of the marchers’ absence from their normal roles in society.
.
If we extract two million people out of a population of 7.4 million, many basic services would be severely affected while many others would grind to a complete halt.
.
Manpower-intensive sectors of society, such as transport, would be badly affected by mass absenteeism. Industries which do their main business on the weekends, such as retail, restaurants, hotels, tourism, coffee shops and so on would be hard hit. Round-the-clock operations such as hospitals and emergency services would be severely troubled, as would under-the-radar jobs such as infrastructure and utility maintenance.
.
There seems to be no evidence that any of that happened in Hong Kong.
.
.
HOW DID WE GET INTO THIS MESS?
.
To understand that, a bit of historical context is necessary.
.
In 2003, a very large number of us walked from Victoria Park to Central. The next day, newspapers gave several estimates of crowd size.
.
The differences were small. Academics said it was 350,000 plus. The police counted 466,000. The organizers, a group called the Civil Rights Front, rounded it up to 500,000.
.
No controversy there. But there was trouble ahead.
.
.
THINGS FALL APART
.
At a repeat march the following year, it was obvious to all of us that our numbers were far lower that the previous year. The people counting agreed: the academics said 194,000 and the police said 200,000.
.
But the Civil Rights Front insisted that there were MORE than the previous year’s march: 530,000 people.
.
The organizers lost credibility even with us, their own supporters. To this day, we all quote the 2003 figure as the high point of that period, ignoring their 2004 invention.
.
.
THE TRUTH COUNTS
.
The organizers had embarrassed the marchers. The following year several organizations decided to serve us better, with detailed, scientific counts.
.
After the 2005 march, the academics said the headcount was between 60,000 and 80,000 and the police said 63,000. Separate accounts by other independent groups agreed that it was below 100,000.
.
But the organizers? The Civil Rights Front came out with the awkward claim that it was a quarter of a million. Ouch. (This data is easily confirmed from multiple sources in newspaper archives.)
.
.
AN UNEXPECTED TWIST
.
But then came a twist. Some in the Western media chose to present ONLY the organizer’s “outlier” claim.
.
“Dressed in black and chanting ‘one man, one vote’, a quarter of a million people marched through Hong Kong yesterday,” said the Times of London in 2005.
.
“A quarter of a million protesters marched through Hong Kong yesterday to demand full democracy from their rulers in Beijing,” reported the UK Independent.
.
It became obvious that international media outlets were committed to emphasizing whichever claim made the Hong Kong government (and by extension, China) look as bad as possible. Accuracy was nowhere in the equation.
.
.
STRATEGICALLY CHOSEN
.
At universities in Hong Kong, there were passionate discussions about the apparent decision to pump up the numbers as a strategy, with the international media in mind. Activists saw two likely positive outcomes.
.
First, anyone who actually wanted the truth would choose a middle point as the “real” number: thus it was worth making the organizers’ number as high as possible. (The police could be presented as corrupt puppets of Beijing.)
.
Second, international reporters always favored the largest number, since it implicitly criticized China. Once the inflated figure was established in the Western media, it would become the generally accepted figure in all publications.
.
Both of the activists’ predictions turned out to be bang on target. In the following years, headcounts by social scientists and police were close or even impressively confirmed the other—but were ignored by the agenda-driven international media, who usually printed only the organizers’ claims.
.
.
SKIP THIS SECTION
.
Skip this section unless you want additional examples to reinforce the point.
.
In 2011, researchers and police said that between 63,000 and 95,000 of us marched. Our delightfully imaginative organizers multiplied by four to claim there were 400,000 of us.
.
In 2012, researchers and police produced headcounts similar to the previous year: between 66,000 and 97,000. But the organizers claimed that it was 430,000. (These data can also be easily confirmed in any newspaper archive.)
.
.
SKIP THIS SECTION TOO
.
Unless you’re interested in the police angle. Why are police figures seen as lower than others? On reviewing data, two points emerge.
.
First, police estimates rise and fall with those of independent researchers, suggesting that they function correctly: they are not invented. Many are slightly lower, but some match closely and others are slightly higher. This suggests that the police simply have a different counting method.
.
Second, police sources explain that live estimates of attendance are used for “effective deployment” of staff. The number of police assigned to work on the scene is a direct reflection of the number of marchers counted. Thus officers have strong motivation to avoid deliberately under-estimating numbers.
.
.
RECENT MASS RALLIES
.
Now back to the present: this hot, uncomfortable summer.
.
Academics put the 2019 June 9 rally at 199,500, and police at 240,000. Some people said the numbers should be raised or even doubled to reflect late joiners or people walking on parallel roads. Taking the most generous view, this gave us total estimates of 400,000 to 480,000.
.
But the organizers, God bless them, claimed that 1.03 million marched: this was four times the researchers’ conservative view and more than double the generous view.
.
The addition of the “.03m” caused a bit of mirth among social scientists. Even an academic writing in the rabidly pro-activist Hong Kong Free Press struggled to accept it. “Undoubtedly, the anti-amendment group added the extra .03 onto the exact one million figure in order to give their estimate a veneer of accuracy,” wrote Paul Stapleton.
.
.
MIND-BOGGLING ESTIMATE
.
But the vast majority of international media and social media printed ONLY the organizers’ eyebrow-raising claim of a million plus—and their version soon fed back into the system and because the “accepted” number. (Some mentioned other estimates in early reports and then dropped them.)
.
The same process was repeated for the following Sunday, June 16, when the organizers’ frankly unbelievable claim of “about two million” was taken as gospel in the majority of international media.
.
“Two million people in Hong Kong protest China's growing influence,” reported Fox News.
.
“A record two million people – over a quarter of the city’s population” joined the protest, said the Guardian this morning.
.
“Hong Kong leader apologizes as TWO MILLION take to the streets,” said the Sun newspaper in the UK.
.
Friends, colleagues, fellow journalists—what happened to fact-checking? What happened to healthy skepticism? What happened to attempts at balance?
.
.
CONCLUSIONS?
.
I offer none. I prefer that you do your own research and draw your own conclusions. This is just a rough overview of the scientific and historical data by a single old-school citizen-journalist working in a university coffee shop.
.
I may well have made errors on individual data points, although the overall message, I hope, is clear.
.
Hong Kong people like to march.
.
We deserve better data.
.
We need better journalism. Easily debunked claims like “more than a quarter of the population hit the streets” help nobody.
.
International media, your hostile agendas are showing. Raise your game.
.
Organizers, stop working against the scientists and start working with them.
.
Hong Kong people value truth.
.
We’re not stupid. (And we’re not scared of math!)
