3.
in his private office with an armed guard immediately outside the door. A puppet supervisor was appointed by the Japanese to the editorial staff and such supervision was maintained through- out the occupation. Despite these obstacles Shum claims that he and his editorial staff seized every opportunity, by means of double-meaning headlines, by leading articles and by cartoons to give the readers of his paper a true picture of the successes of the United Nations and of the ultimate certainty of the defeat of the Japanese. In this connexion it is of interest to note that apart from the official Japanese press releases which had to be printed verbatim (and which of course appeared simul- taneously in all the newspapers and were therefore obviously Japanese propaganda) the newspapers were given outline instruc- tions for the preparation of articles which would have to be
In this type of submitted for censorship before publication. article there would obviously be scope for ingenuity in con- veying to the readers of the newspaper the true course of the Shum's claim to have done this is supported by respon- sible members of the Chinese and European communities who were
While therefore it can be here during the enemy occupation. contended that persons who published Japanese propaganda dero- gating to China and her Allies were assisting the enemy, the true intent of these persons must also be examined and their general conduct and the circumstances in which they were placed must be taken into consideration.
war.
5.
The second charge against Shum is that his newspaper, although published in Hong Kong, was distributed over a con- siderable part of the Chinese territory occupied by the Japanese
Page 110Page 111