An Empirical Study of Potential Breach of Psychological Contract of Hong Kong Journalist Towards the Swift of Editorial Direction Between June and July 2019 After the Announcement of Fugitive Ordinance in Hong Kong

This paper is to apply psychological contract theory to interview the perspective of editors in Hong Kong in local privately-owned company regarding whether there is a breach of bonding with their media company from change of editorial direction set by the upper management and shareholders towards the news choice and reporting perspective different from what they expect the company to do. Hong Kong has experienced social instability between June and July 2019 since the announcement of Fugitive Ordinance from the Hong Kong government, and newspaper are forced to take a side during the political movement. Article 27 of Basic Law of Hong Kong stating that Hong Kong residents shall have freedom of speech, of the press and of publication; freedom of association, of assembly, of the procession and of demonstration; and the right and freedom to form and join trade unions, and to strike. Despite that there is no fundamental constitutional change on Article 2017, a number of local media have been purchased by mainland China capital, and the executives or shareholders of those companies are offered honorary positions in central government which may have had an impact on their control on the editorial staff. As a result, Hong Kong's ranking dropped by 18th in 2002 to 70th in 2018 on the press freedom index ranked by the Reporters without Borders on the World Press Freedom Index. 10 news workers from Hong Kong-privately-owned newspapers were interviewed anonymously for this research. The media companies they work for are considered to be pro-democratic and liberal and is not in line with the government's stand.