上一期《大學線》專題，題材大圍繞著大陸、澳門或台灣的故事，當時因為廣州亞運會是最矚目的。說真的，要不是我身在香港，我根本不會鳥這件事。馬來西亞也有想過舉辦，後來發現不划算就退出了。 *鼓掌！* 雖然九月尾已經截了稿，但由於印刷程序出問題，搞到上兩個星期才出版。我必須等到出版了才能把採訪資料作私人用途，免得惹上什麼亂七八糟的知識產權問題。以下是剪報，想閱讀的可以到這個網址，點擊37頁。網頁比較大，TM Net閃電般的網速可能會考驗大家的耐心，本人在此表深表遺憾： http://www.com.cuhk.edu.hk/ubeat/
這次北上主要是為了了解廣州亞運會對歷史建築的破壞，看看在這盛事前夕，人們的生活起居如何被興建、復修、美化等等的工程所影響。這次的跨境採訪經驗讓我有所體驗，也從中認清了一些事實。這次沒能拍很多，一手錄音筆，一手筆錄快忙死了，這些多數是相機掛在胸前時或單手隨便按快門的。邊看邊說吧！
我們四個女生（兩名記者，編輯和總編）一大早就在羅湖地鐵站回合。當天我凌晨四點半就起床，背著相機抹黑從山頂的宿舍滾到山腳的火車站，過關後再搭“和諧號”到廣州去，大概一個半小時的車程，單程57塊港幣。我沒去過廣州，興奮得像個遊客，雖然精神恍惚，但還是 一直盯著在窗外迅速閃過的景色，有點忘了我是出差的 XD。出發前還緊張兮兮的，檢查電話、相機、錄音筆的電池，準備名片和護照，兌換人民幣，把所有受訪者的電話地址搞清楚後，還打印了一份廣州地鐵地鐵，迷路了至少有個概念自己在哪。不在自己的base做採訪麻煩死了，N多種瑣碎事要處理。
我們是中國線記者
第一站：沙面
我們約了受訪者邊走邊聊，聽他說說這個地方的歷史
早上這裡很恬靜，一路上還看到有時尚雜誌在這裡取景
這裡的一磚一木承載了多少人的記憶。
可惜礙於政府保育政策，不准業主改變房子的面貌或改建，業主只好讓房子自己坍塌後再重建
這...…還能叫保育哦？
=.="
好後悔穿了長的牛仔褲去，夏天啊，焗死了！～
為了將迎亞運，一堆“面子工程”正如火如荼地進行
搞到整個廣州烏煙瘴氣，沙層滾滾
那麼危險還讓小朋友在附近玩耍
裝修裝修裝修
沿著這條街是延綿的騎樓,充滿老廣州的韻味
騎樓後面的住宅因為亞運會而遭清拆，後來文化人和政府吵了幾個月
計劃被擱置，騎樓保留下來，但已經造成破壞
挖得坑坑巴巴的，本來很旺的地段都變那麼冷清了
我本來以為“騎樓”是什麼稀奇東西，原來和吉隆坡那種舊建築是一樣的。我不知道大馬在歷史保育工作上處理得如何，但我從來沒有聽過有人敢碰那些老建築；去吉隆坡、檳城、馬六甲轉一圈到處都有。最令我感到不解的是，當和內地及香港人談關於保育這個議題，開口閉口又是政治，又是利益的。我心想：有必要鬧得那麼複雜咩？這裡的新聞風氣就是什麼鬼東西都吵一番，吵到天翻地覆，每天示威遊行，隔空喊話，到最後大家沒有從事件中了解了什麼，然後就不了了之。 我們還去了一趟廣州的中山大學，和一位地理科學與城市規劃系的袁奇峰教授做訪問。這個專題很heavy，太多跟城市計劃與經濟歷史的關係要理清， 幸好是用普通話進行訪問，不然一堆術語用廣東話說會更難過的。中山大學超漂亮的！！內地大學很大很大，可以像歐美那種，在校園裡踏腳車，在一片大草原中野餐、攤在樹下看書睡午覺。可惜我無暇拍照，好想再回去好好逛一趟啊～ T_______T
——————————————————————————————————————————————
後記：
呃，這裡麻煩各位轉台一下，英文比較順手。
Honestly, there was so SO SO MUCH FRUSTRATION in the making of this feature story. Right from preparation, process to finishing. Out of the 5 features I’ve done, there was nothing as terrible as this one. First, I’ve never been to Guang Zhou and I barely understood what the hell, why the hell or how the hell the issue unfold. So it took me a lot of effort to make sense out of a pile of information. Mind you, it wasn’t anything pleasant to read. They were all boring news about policies, academic publication and worse, interviewee opinions which were completely different from what we though should have been.
We went all they way there, prepared for 4 interviews. Only 2 was successful, the other one didn’t show up without prior notice, explanation or apology (go screw yourself,bastard! Rejection in the first place is better than no show). The other one completed the interview and regretted later at that day, freaking out about being spied on if he appear in media (dude, you’re there and it publishes HERE. And plus, its bloody uni magazine, you think govt. gives a crap?)Another round of time and energy wasting. Even then, I accepted the fact that it’s out of our control, people are not obligated to see us anyway. We’ll just have to try harder and look for another person to put the story together.
In the process, there was no clear angle to tackle the question. Beating around the bushes, the focus of the story kept changing. First, the editor wanted Asia Games to be the main highlight, then it changed to become just a subtitle because the reconstruction has been going on even before that decided to hold the event, Asia Games only accelerated the process. Then she wanted to not only highlight comments from residents but also the super complicated stuff like policies, economics and political issues behind the demolition of historical sites. In short, I had no idea what the fuck she wants. I’ve been trying so hard to catch up with her ever changing direction for the story. They way she spits out Cantonese like a bullet train along with her syok sendiri superiority attitude often made me thought “maybe I’m not getting things right, I better buck up”. Things were not looking optimistic and we were pressed to look for more respondent. I’ve done 3 interviews with Guang Zhou Chinese residing in HK on my own and I felt that the story should take a softer approach to mainly address emotions and helplessness of the residents under China’s iron fist of authority, rather than bombarding readers with crazy mind-screwing heavy subjects with 2.5k word limit. It takes skills to present complicated shit in 2.5k words and I’m no Times or Newsweek journalist.(Heck, even the serious stuff they write has some humor in it)
There’s this stupid mentality my journalism school instill in students, Hard News = Smart. Hard news here doesn’t refer to serious issue, it means “complicated issue further complicated by journalist”(My apology for using the general term "journalist”, that’s what they like to call themselves) What’s the point of writing when nobody knows what you’re writing? Does confusing and belittling readers feed your narcissism? So what if you know the word GDP? (Heck,GDP doesn’t even translate to 國民生產總值, it’s 國內生產總值. I refuse to take blame for not proof-reading, I never use this in my writing nor have I ever used it in Chinese) I’m not opposing against the importance of learning how to produce hard news, but I am definitely against prioritizing it. Soft or hard, especially features story with thousands of words devoted to address one issue, should be judged based on impact it brings about. If people learn something from your article, means they were able to assimilate the content,else, they’re merely black squiggles on white paper. We were taught: the function of media is to inform and educate the public. I’d say overrated, if this is how future journalists are trained.
Anyhow, I appreciate the experience, it’s been an eye opener. If not for all the frustration, I wouldn’t have know why am I always so pissed. All along I’ve been taking it personally and try so damn hard to get on the bandwagon. Sound like sour grapes? Lol, alright then, whatever makes you happy. You wouldn’t have listened anyway. (Wait, do I even get to talk when I “talk” to you?) I don’t agree with how you make of it, but I give you my respect for being a responsible editor, and that’s all I can offer.
那天我們打算到中環去看設計展，誰知道星期天沒開，唯有用她的菲林相機拍照留念。 
