“We are publishing a newspaper for Hong Kong people.”
That was the mission statement set out by Apple Daily in its inaugural editorial on 20 June 1995. Headlined We Belong to Hong Kong, it established the paper’s identity as more than simply a news outlet. For the next 26 years, Apple Daily sought to position itself alongside the people of Hong Kong.
Its founding editorial ended with a declaration that would come to define the newspaper’s outlook: “We firmly believe that Hong Kong people, accustomed to freedom, will never silently endure unreasonable restrictions or unfair treatment, because the pursuit of freedom is part of their nature.”
For Apple Daily, standing alongside Hong Kong meant challenging authority, scrutinising those in power and giving voice to public dissent. It was a role that earned the newspaper a loyal readership, but also made it a persistent target of Beijing and the Hong Kong authorities.
On 24 June 2021, under the shadow of the National Security Law, Apple Daily printed its final edition. Its founder, Jimmy Lai, and six senior editorial staff were later convicted and handed prison sentences of up to 20 years.
Five years on, the closure of Apple Daily has come to symbolise a wider transformation of Hong Kong. Press freedom has sharply declined, journalists face mounting legal and political pressures, and many observers argue that the city has lost not only a newspaper, but a vital part of the civic culture that once distinguished it.
From Tiananmen to the Newsroom
The 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown proved a turning point in Jimmy Lai’s life. Having built a fortune in the fashion industry, he turned his attention to publishing, launching Next Magazine in 1990 before founding Apple Daily five years later.
The newspaper’s commitment to covering politically sensitive issues was evident from the outset. Every year, it marked the anniversary of the Tiananmen crackdown with prominent front-page coverage of Hong Kong’s candlelight vigil in Victoria Park.
Its final 4 June front page appeared in 2021 under the headline: They Can Close Victoria Park, But They Cannot Silence the People’s Hearts. By then, Lai was already in prison.
The paper also chronicled the annual 1 July marches, which became a barometer of public opinion following the 2003 demonstration against proposed Article 23 legislation, when an estimated half a million people took to the streets.
From the campaign against National Education and the 2014 Umbrella Movement to the anti-extradition protests of 2019, Apple Daily was not merely reporting on defining moments in Hong Kong’s recent history; it was documenting a society in political flux.
Holding Power to Account
Throughout its existence, Apple Daily built a reputation for aggressive investigative reporting, exposing a succession of political and corporate scandals.
Among its most notable investigations was the 2000 exposé of the former legislator Cheng Kai-nam, who was later jailed for corruption-related offences. In 2003, the newspaper revealed that then Financial Secretary Antony Leung had purchased a luxury vehicle shortly before announcing tax increases, a controversy that ultimately contributed to his resignation.
Subsequent investigations scrutinised housing and land controversies involving senior officials and raised questions over construction standards on the MTR’s Sha Tin–Central Link project.
Supporters saw such reporting as evidence of the press fulfilling its role as a public watchdog. Critics often accused the paper of sensationalism. Yet even detractors acknowledged its ability to set the political agenda and force uncomfortable issues into the public spotlight.
Although Jimmy Lai was an outspoken advocate of free-market economics, and often at odds with organised labour on policy, Apple Daily frequently championed workers when it uncovered evidence of exploitation.
One notable example came ahead of the introduction of Hong Kong’s statutory minimum wage in 2011. In late 2010, the newspaper revealed that Café de Coral, whose chairman Michael Chan Yue-kwong sat on the provisional Minimum Wage Commission, had increased staff wages while simultaneously reclassifying meal breaks as unpaid time. For some employees, the change meant lower take-home pay despite working the same hours.
The revelation triggered a public backlash. The Hong Kong Confederation of Trade Unions organised a territory-wide boycott of the restaurant chain, and the company eventually abandoned the policy.
A Crackdown on the Press
The introduction of the National Security Law on 30 June 2020 marked a watershed moment for Hong Kong’s media landscape. For Apple Daily, long associated with the city’s pro-democracy movement, the consequences were swift and severe.
The newspaper ceased operations less than a year later. In subsequent prosecutions, Jimmy Lai was convicted on charges including conspiracy to collude with foreign forces and conspiracy to publish seditious material, receiving a combined sentence of 20 years’ imprisonment. Six former senior editors and journalists were also jailed, receiving sentences ranging from six years and nine months to ten years.
The authorities have also sought to seize Lai’s assets, applying to confiscate at least HK$127 million. A court hearing on the matter is due to take place on 8 July.
The closure of Apple Daily has become emblematic of broader concerns about the state of media freedom in Hong Kong. In its latest World Press Freedom Index, Reporters Without Borders ranked the city 140th out of 180 countries and territories, placing it for a second consecutive year in the organisation’s lowest category, described as “very serious”.
A recent survey by the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Hong Kong painted a similarly bleak picture. More than two-thirds of respondents said conditions for journalists had worsened over the previous year, an increase on the figure recorded in the club’s earlier survey.
Five years after Apple Daily‘s final edition, concerns about self-censorship, legal risk and commercial pressure continue to shape discussions about the future of journalism in Hong Kong. Critics have also accused some outlets of blurring the line between editorial content and advertising, reviving debate about the relationship between commercial interests and public-interest reporting.
An Inescapable Legacy
Apple Daily was rarely a newspaper that inspired indifference. Its tabloid style, confrontational reporting and willingness to push ethical boundaries attracted fierce criticism as well as loyal support.
Yet regardless of where one stands on its journalism, the newspaper occupies a central place in any account of Hong Kong’s media history over the past three decades.
Its slogans evolved over time — from the populist “An Apple a Day Keeps the Lies Away” to the more succinct “Truth Is Power” — but both reflected a belief that journalism should challenge official narratives rather than merely repeat them.
The media landscape in which Apple Daily once operated has changed profoundly. Subjects that once dominated public debate have largely vanished from the headlines. Political red lines have shifted, and public discussion has narrowed. For many journalists and readers alike, a degree of caution and self-restraint that would once have seemed unusual has become part of everyday reality.
On 1 July 1997, the day Hong Kong was handed over from Britain to China, Apple Daily carried a front-page headline proclaiming: “The Beginning of a Great Era — Hong Kong Believes in Tomorrow.”
Nearly three decades later, those words read less as a prediction than as a reminder of a very different moment in the city’s history.
Photo: Pulse HK