關於 about me writing examples ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

【一念桃花開】(English writing below)
The Peach Blossom Blooms In a Single Thought

我年少時就有暗瘡的問題， 因為使用藥物，後來皮膚就變過敏。

無論是開架或專櫃，不是很多護膚品牌適合我，，而很慶幸的，Innisfree對我的肌膚還蠻管用的。

昨晚，我到Innisfree的專賣店把用完的護膚品空瓶拿去回收。

然後，就在店裡逛，想找我慣用的寒蘭睡眠面膜，可是怎麼找都找不到。我轉頭向身旁熱情的服務小姐詢問。

她便跑去請教一位在收銀台的較資深同事。

得知斷貨了，店員也不曉得幾時會來貨。

後來，我選擇買綠茶睡眠面膜，因為在網路上有讀到不錯的評價。

當收銀員把產品交給我時，她叫我稍等。接著，她找尋了一些贈品送給我。這是許多韓國護膚美妝品牌的一貫作風。

我拿著贈品離開店時，對收銀員的舉動忽然恍然大悟。

我買了一個睡眠面膜

收銀員又送我兩款睡眠面膜的贈品。

這是明智之舉 - 給予客人她會用的產品，而不是一些她可能不會使用的產品。

畢竟，不是每個女生都會在自己的臉上，抹上幾百種護膚品。

其中一個贈品是我剛才在尋找的寒蘭睡眠面膜。

這真是暖心之舉 - 記得客人在尋找的護膚品。

她不知道我是否是這產品的回頭客，或是第一次購買。但重點是，她不但記得我的詢問，還特別贈給我小樣品，讓我這心願得以滿願，不至於白跑一趟。

她這小小的舉動，就是佛法上所說的佈施。

佈施最基本的用意，就是付出自己，解決別人的困厄，給予別人快樂。

盡的心意越多，種的福根越深，若再加上歡喜心去做，那未來際得到的敬愛，必會廣大無邊。

很多人以為佈施這字是用在外人身上，可不知我們身邊的人也一樣仰賴我們的佈施，心靈才能得到愛的滋潤。

我客人當中就有很多這樣的例子：

老公嫌太太忙著孩子，無暇聆聽他的心事，沒有支持他的夢想。

太太嫌老公變了心，沒有像熱戀時那麼地愛護她，照顧家庭。

爸爸嫌兒子不長進，老是打電動。

兒子嫌爸爸不了解他的喜好，總是逼他做他不喜歡的事。

媽媽嫌女兒沒大沒小， 女兒嫌媽媽規矩多。

老闆嫌員工不夠盡責，員工嫌老闆吝嗇。

這些問題的起源，都是來自於兩人計較佈施，或不願佈施。而物以類聚的原理，就會吸引了自己一樣的人。

在家裡，我們需要桃花，才能得到家人之間的愛戴和和睦。

在外，我們也需要桃花，做起事來才會比一般人容易。

而桃花的大小，來自於你能佈施多少的愛。你佈施的心態，也決定了你福報的大小。

我們的周遭都是佈施的機緣，所以不可能沒有機會佈施。

小的佈施，是在家。走出家門，更有大把佈施機會包圍著你，東南西比中，360度你轉哪一個度數，都有佈施的因，是看你怎麼去把握。

所以沒有所謂為什麼命會這樣，而是你沒有把握機會。

嘗試釋放自己，去擁抱一個更有愛的你，更有愛的生活方式。當你能把這快樂帶給很多人時，你會發現你生命的無限潛能，而重新愛上自己。這也是你能給予你自己最大的敬愛，最大的桃花之一了。

p.s. 若不知何謂桃花，可觀看我這影片：https://youtu.be/ECUW9F8Cybg

......................

I have acne skin as a teenager, and somewhere along the way, my skin turned sensitive.

Not many skincare brands, drugstore or over-the-counter, work for me, and Innisfree, to my delight, is one that works

So just now, I dropped by Innisfree to return my empty bottles (in my Stories)

I then browsed the shelves, looking for the Jeju Orchid Sleeping Mask. It was not there. I turned to ask the enthusiastic salesgirl beside me.

She went off to ask the more senior staff, who was behind the cashier counter.

No luck, it was out of stock and they had no idea when it would be back.

I ended up buying the Green Tea Sleeping Mask, having read great reviews online.

As the cashier passed me my purchase, she told me to wait for she wished to give me some samples to try, the de-facto practice of many Korean skincare and makeup brands.

When I left the store with the samples in hand, it dawned on me what the cashier had done.

I bought a sleeping mask.

She gave me two other sleeping mask varieties.

That’s smart - giving what the customer uses, and not some product that that customer may not use.

Not every girl plaster a million products on her face.

One of the samples was the Jeju Orchid Sleeping Mask!

That’s heartwarming - to remember that the customer was looking for.

I could either be keen in that mask, or a repeat buyer. But the key is, not only did she remember my inquiry, she gave me a sample that would not make this trip a wasted one.

This small act of consideration from the sales person is what we called Giving, in Buddhism.

The more thought you put in your giving, the more good fortune you are planting for yourself. When you give with happiness, then the love and respect you receive in future will be vast and boundless.

Many people mistook that the word Giving is to be used on outsiders. They are unaware that the people around us also need our giving to nourish their hearts.

There are many such examples in my clients:

The husband feels that his wife is too occupied with the children. She does not make time to listen to him or support his dream.

The wife rants about her husband having a change of heart and does not care for her, or love the family as before.

The father finds fault with the son's constant gaming, and scolds him for not being hardworking.

The son thinks the father does not care about what he likes, and always forces him to do things that he does not like.

The mother says her daughter is rude to her, while the daughter complains that her mother has too many rules.

The boss sees that his employees are not doing their best, while the employees sees their boss as a stingy man.

All these problems arise from two persons being calculative in giving, or unwilling to give. Given the principle of "Birds of the same feather flock together", you inevitably attract a person who is similar to yourself.

In the confines of our home, we do need Peach Blossom Luck, so that there will be love and harmony among our family.

Beyond our home, Peach Blossom Luck is definitely a must, for that will help us to get things done easier.

The amount of our Peach Blossom Luck is dependant on how much love you give out. The attitude you have when giving will decide the size of your good fortune.

There are plenty of opportunities for us to give, so there is no such thing as no chance to give.

Small acts of giving starts from home.

As you step out of your home door, there are even more giving opportunities surrounding you, no matter which degree of direction you turn.

It is up to you to grasp the opportunity. Like the Innisfree sales person who sees hundreds of people weekly, do your job well, and do it very well every day. That is massive giving, which will sow many seeds of favourable Peach Blossom Luck.

So there is no such thing as to why your Destiny isn't great. It was you who did not make the smart decision to do the right thing.

Try to let go of your resistance, and go embrace a more loving you, a more loving way of living. When you can bring happiness to more people, you will discover the limitless potential in your life and fall in love with yourself all over again. That will be one of the greatest love and respect and Peach Blossom Luck you can give yourself.

p.s. if you do not know what Peach Blossom Luck is, watch my video over here: https://youtu.be/ECUW9F8Cybg

【桃花開在周杰倫】The Peach Blossom named Jay Chou（English writing below)

上星期的Youtube影片中，我談到周杰倫前世如何修到大桃花，以及桃花和個人財富的關係。

2019年9月11日2300H，久未發新歌的周杰倫推出新歌單曲《說好不哭》，兩天內就破一千萬的流量，刷下華語樂壇的新紀錄，而且在超過十個國家，包括美國、澳洲、韓國、德國、新馬港台等，都衝上了Youtube發燒影片第一名。

相比之下，蔡依林去年年尾推出睽違四年的新專輯，打破了傳統歌手唱情歌的套路，其中七首歌都有概念新穎、議論性極高的MV，但影片流量卻不敵這次「周五」的合作。

我不是蔡依林的歌迷，但她這次為專輯的付出真的讓我刮目相看 - 回顧蔡依林出道至今的「黑歷史」MV《怪美》，邀請吳君如一起拍向80、90年代香港電影致敬的MV《腦公》，邀小S拍的MV《紅衣女孩》，以及今年榮獲台灣金曲獎年度歌曲獎的《玫瑰少年》等等。

我個人很喜歡這首《玫瑰少年》。此歌以轟動一時的「葉永鋕事件」為背後故事：葉永鋕，台灣人，國中生，因不同的性別氣質而遭到同學霸凌，不敢在下課時間去上廁所。十五歲那年，葉永鋕在上課時，提前離開教室去上廁所，後來被發現傷重倒臥血泊中，送醫後不治死亡。（取之：维基百科）

而在今年五月，台灣成為第一個將同性婚姻合法化的亞洲國家，讓《玫瑰少年》更具有代表性。

再看看周杰倫這次的新歌《說好不哭》，如果你也覺得「周杰倫是我的青春」，這MV用的許多「情懷梗」，作詞人方文山，神秘來賓五月天阿信，必會讓你驚喜連連。

對我而言，這首歌延續著周氏情歌的曲風，MV拍法沒有突破，並沒有像蔡依林的專輯有那麽強大的創意和正面能量。

可是蔡依林這次別出心裁，影片流量和賺到的錢也不少，卻依然亞於周杰倫。

這一切的現象隱藏著過去世的因果。

據我根本上師聖尊蓮生活佛開示，周杰倫前世修密教的敬愛法，想必他持了天文數字的敬愛咒。他八字寫著，這一世的寫歌本領就是他修來的眾桃花投影。

這桃花非同凡響，改變了華語樂壇對流行歌的審美觀。這次《說好不哭》的MV流量、新歌銷量等，都名列前茅，新歌上線的24小時內，總銷量548.5萬張，售額1645.6萬元人民幣（S$3.2m)。

蔡依林全身都是重桃花相，但就算如此，她和幾個星期前出新歌《對的時間點》的林俊傑，也完全被周杰倫比下去。

一些聰明的Youtuber在《說好不哭》上線24小時內火速推出了自己的翻唱影片，鋼琴彈奏版，歌詞版等。這是很明智的作法，因為不用花錢就能夠沾個邊，借一借周杰倫的桃花來旺自己。如果周杰倫的八字及歌曲旺他們的八字，就會更有效。

網路搜索，加上娛樂新聞頻道的新聞報導，他們的頻道便會迅速增加訂閱和流量。

寫了這麼多，有三點要提醒大家：

1）有幸得到師尊灌頂的敬愛尊咕嚕咕咧佛母和愛染明王法的同門，請勤修此法。

有眾桃花，貴人顯著，做什麼事情真的會比較容易，賺錢也可以比別人快。我個人的修法領悟，如果抱著利益眾生的菩提心來修，效果會更不可思議。

2） 要賺錢，你速度要快。

錢如流水走很快不等人，你要懂得觀察局勢，學學那些Youtubers的掙錢速度及魄力。如果還是不會， 批八字看風水時，可請教你的師父如何迅速為自己增強桃花。

3）往對的方向，用對的方法努力，能改自己和別人的命

無論你八字中有沒有眾生緣，你要有錢，有敬愛的魅力，你都得努力地去結眾生緣，持續地去佈施，慢慢地去積累。因為再多的眾生緣，也會有用完的一天。

以上的歌手都是努力的典範，包括那些Youtubers。因為努力而產生的影響力，能引導他人改自己的運勢，你的功德可加倍。

不要一日一日地這樣荒廢青春，別把時間都給了家人，而吝於給他人。佈施要用心思，要不然，有一天福報見底時，你和你的家人就會出現資糧荒的現況了。

「聰明人將精力用於預防和積累，而蠢蛋則寄望於補救。」

..........................

In my Youtube video last week, I talked about how Jay Chou cultivated his great Peach Blossoms in his past life and the correlation between your personal wealth and your Peach Blossoms.

On 11 September 2019 2300H, Jay Chou released his much-awaited new song "Won't Cry". His MV crossed 10 millions views within 48 hours on Youtube, setting a new record for Chinese music entertainment scene, and was the #1 trending MV in over 10 countries, including USA, Australia, Korea, Germany, Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong and Taiwan. His latest single also crashed Chinese music streaming site QQ music in less than a hour after its release.

In comparison, Jolin Tsai launched her new concept album end of last year, after a hiatus of 4 years. The album broke out of the conventional love ballads typical of Mandopop. 7 songs in this album were launched on Youtube with very creative and artsy music videos, which attracted much online discussion.

Yet the views on her MV cannot be compared with Jay Chou's latest MV.

While I am not a fan of Jolin Tsai, I applaud her effort for this album. The Ugly Beauty MV talks about the criticisms that Jolin Tsai had received since her debut. The Hubby MV was a salute to Hong Kong movies in the 80s & 90s, with Sandra Wu guest starring. Xiao S was also invited for her Lady in Red MV. The song Womxnly won the Song of the Year in this year's Golden Melody Awards, while this album won Album of the Year.

My personal favourite is the song Womxnly, which was inspired by the sensational story of Yeh Yung-chih, a secondary school Taiwanese student who had been long bullied for his perceived effeminate behaviour and thus, never dared to go to the school toilet at break times. One day, just five minutes before school ended, he was found dead in the school’s restroom in a pool of blood at the age of 15.

In May this year, Taiwan became the first Asian country to legalise same-sex marriage and Womxnly became even more symbolic.

Let's now take a look at Jay Chou's new single Won't Cry. If you also think that "Jay Chou is my youth", the many punchlines in this MV, the lyricist Vincent Fang and the mystery guest Ashin of Mayday will have you grinning in surprise.

To me, while this song is not bad and a continuation of Jay Chou's love ballad style, it does not carry as much creativity and positive energy as Jolin Tsai's Ugly Beauty album. Jay Chou's MV was also pretty similar to many of his past MVs. There was no breakthrough.

Yet, beneath all that we have seen till now, is the karma from many past lives.

My Root Guru, His Holiness Living Buddha expounded that in Jay Chou's past life, he practiced the Magnetization Sadhana of Varjayana, and had recited an astronomical number of the mantra of Love and Respect. As stated in his Bazi, his songwriting talent this lifetime is a reflection of his cultivated Peach Blossoms of Mass Appeal.

This is an extraordinary Peach Blossom, as it rewrote the judgment standard of Mandopop. The viewership of Jay Chou's Won't Cry MV and sales volume of the single are just as astounding. Within 24 hours of release, his new song sold 5.485 million copies online and raked in S$3.2million.

The entire physical appearance of Jolin Tsai spells of heavy Peach Blossom of mass appeal. However, with Jay Chou in the picture, both she and JJ Lin Junjie who released a new single The Right Time 3 weeks ago paled in comparison.

Some clever Youtubers quickly uploaded their own covers, in less than 24 hours of Jay Chou's new song release. There were cover songs, piano versions, and lyric version. This is a very smart way of leveraging on Jay Chou's Peach Blossom luck for FREE. Works best if the song and Jay Chou’s Bazi are compatible with their Bazi.

Through online searches and online entertainment channels who report about the covers, the Youtubers get to boost their subscriber volumes and viewership at a much faster rate.

These are the 3 points I wish to highlight to everyone after writing so much:

1) To my fellow Dharma brothers and sisters who are fortunate enough to receive our Root Guru's Dharma empowerment of Kurukullā and Rāgarāja, please cultivate this Sadhana diligently.

When you have Peach Blossom of Mass Appeal, your benefactors are prominent and everything that you do in life gets easily done, even earning money is faster for you. My personal experience is that if you practice this Sadhana with the Bodhicitta heart to benefit sentient beings, the effects will be incredible.

2) If you make money, you must be speedy.

Money waits for no man. You have to know how to observe the situations and learn the money-making speed and drive of those Youtubers. If you do not know how, seek the advise of your Chinese Metaphysics practitioner, when getting your Bazi analysed or Feng Shui audit done.

3）Move in the right direction with the right method, and you can change your life and others' too.

Regardless your Bazi has mass appeal affinity or not, to have money, to have charisma of Love and Respect, you must be diligent in forming mass positive affinities. Learn to give and accumulate your way through. For no matter how many mass affinities you have, they get expedited over time.

The celebrities and Youtubers I mentioned above are examples of diligence.

When your hard work brings you the ability to influence, you will be able to guide others to improve their luck, be it you are conscious of it or not. And that doubles up your merits.

Don't squander your youth by living aimlessly. Don't blindly give all your time to your family and be miserly in giving your time to others.

Constant giving requires thought, otherwise when your good fortune hits rock bottom, you and your family will face a dire drought of life resources.

"The smart one spends his effort in prevention and accumulation, while the fool puts his hope in salvaging. "

根據計算，100萬人遊行隊伍要從維多利亞公園排到廣東；200萬人遊行則要排到泰國。

順道一提香港15～30歲人口約莫100出頭萬人。以照片人群幾乎都是此年齡帶來看，兩個數字都是明顯誇大太多了。

另一個可以參考的是1969年的Woodstock Music & Art Fair，幾天內湧進40萬人次，照片看起來也是滿山滿谷的人。（http://sites.psu.edu/…/upl…/sites/851/2013/01/Woodstock3.jpg）

當年40萬人次引發驚人的大塞車，幾乎花十幾個小時才逐漸清場。

而香港遊行清場速度明顯快得多。

順道一提，因此運動而認定「你的父母不愛你」的白痴論述也如同文化大革命時的「爹親娘親不如毛主席親」般開始出現：

https://www.facebook.com/SaluteToHKPolice/videos/350606498983830/UzpfSTUyNzM2NjA3MzoxMDE1NjMyMTM4NjY3MTA3NA/

EVERY MAJOR NEWS outlet in the world is reporting that two million people, well over a quarter of our population, joined a single protest.
.
It’s an astonishing thought that filled an enthusiastic old marcher like me with pride. Unfortunately, it’s almost certainly not true.
.
A march of two million people would fill a street that was 58 kilometers long, starting at Victoria Park in Hong Kong and ending in Tanglangshan Country Park in Guangdong, according to one standard crowd estimation technique.
.
If the two million of us stood in a queue, we’d stretch 914 kilometers (568 miles), from Victoria Park to Thailand. Even if all of us marched in a regiment 25 people abreast, our troop would stretch towards the Chinese border.
.
Yes, there was a very large number of us there. But getting key facts wrong helps nobody. Indeed, it could hurt the protesters more than anyone.
.
For math geeks only, here’s a discussion of the actual numbers that I hope will interest you whatever your political views.
.
.
DO NUMBERS MATTER?
.
People have repeatedly asked me to find out “the real number” of people at the recent mass rallies in Hong Kong.
.
I declined for an obvious reason: There was a huge number of us. What does it matter whether it was hundreds of thousands or a million? That’s not important.
.
But my critics pointed out that the word “million” is right at the top of almost every report about the marches. Clearly it IS important.
.
.
FIRST, THE SCIENCE
.
In the west, drone photography is analyzed to estimate crowd sizes.
.
This reporter apologizes for not having found a comprehensive database of drone images of the Hong Kong protests.
.
But we can still use related methods, such as density checks, crowd-flow data and impact assessments. Universities which have gathered Hong Kong protest march data using scientific methods include Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, University of Hong Kong, and Hong Kong Baptist University.
.
.
DENSITY CHECKS
.
Figures gathered in the past by Hong Kong Polytechnic specialists using satellite photo analysis found a density level of one square meter per marcher. Modern analysis suggests this remains roughly accurate.
.
I know from experience that Hong Kong marches feature long periods of normal spacing (one square meter or one and half per person, walking) and shorter periods of tight spacing (half a square meter or less per person, mostly standing).
.
.
JOINERS AND SPEED
.
We need to include people who join halfway. In the past, a Hong Kong University analysis using visual counting methods cross-referenced with one-on-one interviews indicated that estimates should be boosted by 12% to accurately reflect late joiners. These days, we’re much more generous in estimating joiners.
.
As for speed, a Hong Kong Baptist University survey once found a passing rate of 4,000 marchers every ten minutes.
.
Videos of the recent rallies indicates that joiner numbers and stop-start progress were highly erratic and difficult to calculate with any degree of certainty.
.
.
DISTANCE MULTIPLIED BY DENSITY
.
But scientists have other tools. We know the walking distance between Victoria Park and Tamar Park is 2.9 kilometers. Although there was overspill, the bulk of the marchers went along Hennessy Road in Wan Chai, which is about 25 meters (or 82 feet) wide, and similar connected roads, some wider, some narrower.
.
Steve Doig, a specialist in crowd analysis approached by the Columbia Journalism Review (CJR), analyzed an image of Hong Kong marchers to find a density level of 7,000 people in a 210-meter space. Although he emphasizes that crowd estimates are never an exact science, that figure means one million Hong Kong marchers would need a street 18.6 miles long – which is 29 kilometers.
.
Extrapolating these figures for the June 16 claim of two million marchers, you’d need a street 58 kilometers long.
.
Could this problem be explained away by the turnover rate of Hong Kong marchers, which likely allowed the main (three kilometer) route to be filled more than once?
.
The answer is yes, to some extent. But the crowd would have to be moving very fast to refill the space a great many times over in a single afternoon and evening. It wasn’t. While I can walk the distance from Victoria Park to Tamar in 41 minutes on a quiet holiday afternoon, doing the same thing during a march takes many hours.
.
More believable: There was a huge number of us, but not a million, and certainly not two million.
.
.
IMPACT MEASUREMENTS
.
A second, parallel way of analyzing the size of the crowd is to seek evidence of the effects of the marchers’ absence from their normal roles in society.
.
If we extract two million people out of a population of 7.4 million, many basic services would be severely affected while many others would grind to a complete halt.
.
Manpower-intensive sectors of society, such as transport, would be badly affected by mass absenteeism. Industries which do their main business on the weekends, such as retail, restaurants, hotels, tourism, coffee shops and so on would be hard hit. Round-the-clock operations such as hospitals and emergency services would be severely troubled, as would under-the-radar jobs such as infrastructure and utility maintenance.
.
There seems to be no evidence that any of that happened in Hong Kong.
.
.
HOW DID WE GET INTO THIS MESS?
.
To understand that, a bit of historical context is necessary.
.
In 2003, a very large number of us walked from Victoria Park to Central. The next day, newspapers gave several estimates of crowd size.
.
The differences were small. Academics said it was 350,000 plus. The police counted 466,000. The organizers, a group called the Civil Rights Front, rounded it up to 500,000.
.
No controversy there. But there was trouble ahead.
.
.
THINGS FALL APART
.
At a repeat march the following year, it was obvious to all of us that our numbers were far lower that the previous year. The people counting agreed: the academics said 194,000 and the police said 200,000.
.
But the Civil Rights Front insisted that there were MORE than the previous year’s march: 530,000 people.
.
The organizers lost credibility even with us, their own supporters. To this day, we all quote the 2003 figure as the high point of that period, ignoring their 2004 invention.
.
.
THE TRUTH COUNTS
.
The organizers had embarrassed the marchers. The following year several organizations decided to serve us better, with detailed, scientific counts.
.
After the 2005 march, the academics said the headcount was between 60,000 and 80,000 and the police said 63,000. Separate accounts by other independent groups agreed that it was below 100,000.
.
But the organizers? The Civil Rights Front came out with the awkward claim that it was a quarter of a million. Ouch. (This data is easily confirmed from multiple sources in newspaper archives.)
.
.
AN UNEXPECTED TWIST
.
But then came a twist. Some in the Western media chose to present ONLY the organizer’s “outlier” claim.
.
“Dressed in black and chanting ‘one man, one vote’, a quarter of a million people marched through Hong Kong yesterday,” said the Times of London in 2005.
.
“A quarter of a million protesters marched through Hong Kong yesterday to demand full democracy from their rulers in Beijing,” reported the UK Independent.
.
It became obvious that international media outlets were committed to emphasizing whichever claim made the Hong Kong government (and by extension, China) look as bad as possible. Accuracy was nowhere in the equation.
.
.
STRATEGICALLY CHOSEN
.
At universities in Hong Kong, there were passionate discussions about the apparent decision to pump up the numbers as a strategy, with the international media in mind. Activists saw two likely positive outcomes.
.
First, anyone who actually wanted the truth would choose a middle point as the “real” number: thus it was worth making the organizers’ number as high as possible. (The police could be presented as corrupt puppets of Beijing.)
.
Second, international reporters always favored the largest number, since it implicitly criticized China. Once the inflated figure was established in the Western media, it would become the generally accepted figure in all publications.
.
Both of the activists’ predictions turned out to be bang on target. In the following years, headcounts by social scientists and police were close or even impressively confirmed the other—but were ignored by the agenda-driven international media, who usually printed only the organizers’ claims.
.
.
SKIP THIS SECTION
.
Skip this section unless you want additional examples to reinforce the point.
.
In 2011, researchers and police said that between 63,000 and 95,000 of us marched. Our delightfully imaginative organizers multiplied by four to claim there were 400,000 of us.
.
In 2012, researchers and police produced headcounts similar to the previous year: between 66,000 and 97,000. But the organizers claimed that it was 430,000. (These data can also be easily confirmed in any newspaper archive.)
.
.
SKIP THIS SECTION TOO
.
Unless you’re interested in the police angle. Why are police figures seen as lower than others? On reviewing data, two points emerge.
.
First, police estimates rise and fall with those of independent researchers, suggesting that they function correctly: they are not invented. Many are slightly lower, but some match closely and others are slightly higher. This suggests that the police simply have a different counting method.
.
Second, police sources explain that live estimates of attendance are used for “effective deployment” of staff. The number of police assigned to work on the scene is a direct reflection of the number of marchers counted. Thus officers have strong motivation to avoid deliberately under-estimating numbers.
.
.
RECENT MASS RALLIES
.
Now back to the present: this hot, uncomfortable summer.
.
Academics put the 2019 June 9 rally at 199,500, and police at 240,000. Some people said the numbers should be raised or even doubled to reflect late joiners or people walking on parallel roads. Taking the most generous view, this gave us total estimates of 400,000 to 480,000.
.
But the organizers, God bless them, claimed that 1.03 million marched: this was four times the researchers’ conservative view and more than double the generous view.
.
The addition of the “.03m” caused a bit of mirth among social scientists. Even an academic writing in the rabidly pro-activist Hong Kong Free Press struggled to accept it. “Undoubtedly, the anti-amendment group added the extra .03 onto the exact one million figure in order to give their estimate a veneer of accuracy,” wrote Paul Stapleton.
.
.
MIND-BOGGLING ESTIMATE
.
But the vast majority of international media and social media printed ONLY the organizers’ eyebrow-raising claim of a million plus—and their version soon fed back into the system and because the “accepted” number. (Some mentioned other estimates in early reports and then dropped them.)
.
The same process was repeated for the following Sunday, June 16, when the organizers’ frankly unbelievable claim of “about two million” was taken as gospel in the majority of international media.
.
“Two million people in Hong Kong protest China's growing influence,” reported Fox News.
.
“A record two million people – over a quarter of the city’s population” joined the protest, said the Guardian this morning.
.
“Hong Kong leader apologizes as TWO MILLION take to the streets,” said the Sun newspaper in the UK.
.
Friends, colleagues, fellow journalists—what happened to fact-checking? What happened to healthy skepticism? What happened to attempts at balance?
.
.
CONCLUSIONS?
.
I offer none. I prefer that you do your own research and draw your own conclusions. This is just a rough overview of the scientific and historical data by a single old-school citizen-journalist working in a university coffee shop.
.
I may well have made errors on individual data points, although the overall message, I hope, is clear.
.
Hong Kong people like to march.
.
We deserve better data.
.
We need better journalism. Easily debunked claims like “more than a quarter of the population hit the streets” help nobody.
.
International media, your hostile agendas are showing. Raise your game.
.
Organizers, stop working against the scientists and start working with them.
.
Hong Kong people value truth.
.
We’re not stupid. (And we’re not scared of math!)