SML Search

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Where to stay in Hong Kong

No comments:

A lot of my friends from New York are traveling to Hong Kong and they often asked me where they should stay at. Instead of typing essay-length emails every time, I thought that I will create a blog post of my original email so I can just reference this in the future.

Depending on your price range. Centrally located + good + inexpensive options are:

  • YMCA Salisbury at Tsim Sha Tsui (next to Hong Kong Cultural Centre, Hong Kong Art Museum, Peninsula Hong Kong) – Kowloon
  • YMCA Wan Chai (next to Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre, Hong Kong Art Center, Hong Kong Academy of Performing Arts) – Hong Kong Island

Moderately priced:

  • Sheraton Hong Kong in Tsim Sha Shui (TST) – Kowloon
  • Renaissance Wan Chai – Hong Kong Island

If cost is not a criteria for consideration or your client is paying for your stay, then consider these options:

  • Intercontinental Kowloon in Tsim Sha Shui (TST) — the original Regent Hong Kong, sold to Intercontinental. Amazing sea views. I used to go to the coffee shop in the lobby for fantastic homemade ice cream in the weekends when I was little.
  • Four Seasons Hong Kong in Central (Hong Kong Island) — with Hong Kong's only Michelin 3-Star restaurant Lung King Heen (Foursquare, where SML is currently the mayor), Four Seasons Hong Kong is the place to stay at in if you are a foodie. Four Seasons also has a very responsive Twitter presence and they have been very helpful to many of my queries. Highly recommended.

In general you would want to find hotels around TST / Wan Chai. The urban planning of Hong Kong is buzzing in downtown – and to access all 11 types of transportation, the hub is also there. You can check-in to airport downtown also so this is your best option. I don't know where your conference is, but most likely it would be on Hong Kong Island, so Wan Chai might be more convenience / next door.

There might be even more inexpensive options but I don't really know about them so I can't really recommend any. You can send me listings that you saw on hotel booking site and I can let you know what I know about them. The really cheap lodging options in Hong Kong can potentially be dangerous.

If you don't mind traveling for long distance (subway 30mins to downtown, for example), however, there are cheaper options – for example there is a hotel right next to where I live: Hyatt Regency Shatin (25 mins to TST, 30 mins to Central, approx $1,200 HKD ~ $130 USD) which is in fact the hotel facilities of the teaching hotel for School of Hotel and Tourism Management at The Chinese University of Hong Kong – think Cornell's Hotel / Hospitality. Food is super yummy there.

Sunday, November 4, 2012

Journalism Ethics: Thoughts on Forbes' report about Sandy by Mark H. Bergen

No comments:

A few days ago I saw a tweet posted by Forbes (@forbes / SML Wiki) written by Mark H. Bergen (@mhbergen / SML Wiki) in which it was summarized as “Asian megacities are awaiting superstorm fates much worse than Sandy”

Media reports like these infuriates me, because instead of spending valuable resources in solving the crisis, Forbes has chosen to use this as opportunity to trivialize technologies in Asia.

I consider this form of journalism to be propaganda—a report disguised as “analysis” to further hate and dis-education about the reality of technology in Asia and to further the fanatic “patriotism” for Americans into believing that they are truly far superior in everything that they do.

What is far more alarming then is that the title tag of declares themselves as “Information for the World's Business Leaders“. If articles like this is considered valuable information for “World's Business Leaders” then I would like to know how Forbes define the word “business leaders”.

But this gets worse. I got a reply from Mark Bergen on Twitter suggesting that I am questioning his journalism integrity in reference to World Bank / ADB / UN data.

Say what? How does a journalist, a self declared “business reporter… [who blogs] on urban economics for Forbes and report on politics and policies for The Atlantic Cities, GOOD, and Next American City, among others… worked as an investigative reporter and policy researcher“ ( with a “BA in sociology from the College of Wooster” and a ”Masters in Public Policy from the University of Chicago” came to interpret my criticism as something as moronic as that?

Mark Bergen thought that I was misquoting him because he did not write that. Ok so perhaps I should not put quotes on things which people did not write, but the implications are the same. If he did not write the words “poorer civil engineering” then he most definitely wrote this bit right from the beginning of the article:

the morbidly obvious: emerging market cities are deeply vulnerable to climate change disasters like Sandy. Even if future storms are lesser, their impact on coastal Asian cities would be greater. The combination of booming populations and inadequate infrastructure means sea-level rise alone could paralyze Shanghai, bankrupt Kolkata and make Mumbai virtually unlivable.

If this was not @mhbergen's thesis, then I think that he ought clarify with Forbes as evidently Mark seems to think that I have mistaken his viewpoint.

I am still waiting for responses from Mark Bergen and Forbes for their clarification of intention in publishing this article.

Nothing wrong with criticisms, but clear slandering like this is simply unethical. If this had appeared on a personal blog I would dismiss it as narrow-minded-ness. But this article was not published on a personal blog. It was published on a “mainstream” media site. I tend to consider that anything that's considered “mainstream” to have at least a little bit of moral conscience in deciding what to publish but clearly this is not the case.

Is this why this media publishing conglomerate is privately held (Google Finance)? Being privately held does not grant a publication intended for public consumption — especialy one with a large circulation — to publish anything one wishes. The Economist (Google Finance) is also privately held yet their articles appear to be relatively objective — at least they are ethical. It's hard to maintain an unbiased viewpoint because our experience are formed by what we experienced in our past, but having the foresight to recognize that people are simply different — in other words that life is diverse — allows us to then gain insight to see how we can learn from each other. Failing to see one's weakness and yet blatantly laugh at others is unacceptable.

In Chinese, we have a saying: “五十步笑百步” (Wikipedia: ZH-HK), and it appears that there is a similar saying in English: “The pot calling the kettle black” (Wikipedia: EN). In essence, when you failed to observe that that you are no better if not worse at something, you are frankly in no position to criticize others — let alone without any ability to offer suggestions on how you think something could be improved on.

Yesterday I came across an interesting documentary from North Korea called “Propaganda” which criticizes the US Media's ethics for massive brainwashing people the culture of consumerism:

Someone on YouTube commented which seems fitting though nevertheless interesting:

Propaganda vs propaganda, at least it balances the american media, and is still less crazy than Fox News...

If you have the time, I recommend that you check it out. Interestingly, YouTube marks the video as “17+ materials”. There is nothing pornographic about it – but it would appear to me that even YouTube feels that media consumption without a critical eye is poison to the soul.

Don't place too much emphasis on whether it's US media or that it was produced in North Korea. The focus here is not really about US vs Asia vs World, it is on the effect of media and how it can shape the way we think if we do not always keep an open mind on everything that we read / see regardless of source.

My key take away? Do not blindly trust any single source for information. Read everything. Be diverse. Maintain a personal viewpoint. Be critical. Be curious. Or as Steve Jobs once quoted the back cover of The Whole World Catalog during a Stanford commencement speech: Stay Foolish, Stay Hungry.

Update: 2012-11-05

I have finally received a respond from Mark H. Bergen (@mhbergen) after I posted this blog post.

I don't know why people constantly reference data source as validation. Data source says nothing. Data source is just that: data. Analytics is processed data. Opinions is human thoughts derived through analytics processed from data. Input / Output. The two things do not equate.

But the even more wtf comment would follow next:

Why is Mark asking me about “orientalism”? Did I say that anywhere in my post? Very strange.

In fact, this recurring pattern of MHB's failure to interpret my English makes me think that maybe I am a very poor writer. Either that or he is a very poor English interpreter. A friend upon reading this blog post and checking out SML Wiki: Mark H. Bergen commented that he was shocked by the fact that MHB holds a Masters in Public Policy from The University of Chicago (Twitter). “How is it possible that someone from UChicago to have such poor analytical skills,” he remarked. I have no idea.

Extra: Screenshot of my conversation with Forbes and Mark Bergen on Twitter

Twitter: Forbes @forbes: Asian megacities are awaiing superstorm fates worse than Sandy, writes @mhbergen. / 2012-11-01 / SML Screenshots

Twitter: Forbes @forbes: Asian megacities are awaiing superstorm fates worse than Sandy, writes @mhbergen. / 2012-11-01 / SML Screenshots