Connect with us

Understand the World

Blood clot risk greater after Covid infection

Published

on

The chances of developing dangerous blood clots after being infected with the virus that causes Covid-19 far outweighs the risks of the AstraZeneca and Pfizer vaccines, according to the largest study of its kind.

The sweeping analysis used data from more than 29 million people in England to compare both vaccines with infection from Sars-CoV-2. It weighed up rates of hospital admission or death from blood clots, as well as other blood disorders, within 28 days of either a positive test or receiving the first jab.

The findings were based on data from electronic health records collected between December 1st, 2020, and April 24th, 2021.

In addition to thrombocytopenia (a condition characterised by low platelet counts) and blood clots, the researchers also looked at certain other risks, including CVST (blood clots in the brain) and ischaemic stroke (a blood clot or blockage that cuts off the blood supply to the brain).

Overall, they found an increased risk of thrombocytopenia, blood clots in veins and other rare arterial blood clots after a first dose of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine. After the first dose of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, they found a higher risk of blood clots in arteries and ischaemic stroke.

However, the data showed that there would be 934 extra cases of thrombocytopenia for every 10 million people after infection, compared with 107 after the first shot of the AstraZeneca jab. For ischaemic strokes, there would be an estimated 1,699 extra cases for every 10 million people after infection, while there would be only 143 extra cases after the first Pfizer jab.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Understand the World

Tyler’s Cyclone

Published

on

By

Following her global tour that began last year, Taylor Swift has become an economic force to be reckoned with, with each tour bringing not only musical enjoyment to her fans, but also new opportunities and challenges to local economies. Each of her tours not only brings fans the enjoyment of music, but also brings new opportunities and challenges to local economies.

 

Global Touring Helps Local Economies Soar

Taylor Swift’s The Eras Tour, which took place at Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG) in Melbourne, Australia on February 16th, recorded a record attendance of 96,000 people. According to Forbes Australia, experts from RMIT University in Melbourne have estimated that the seven concerts held in Melbourne and Sydney, Australia by “Mildew” will record huge economic benefits. According to the estimation of Angel Zhong, Associate Professor of RMIT University’s Department of Finance, each fan will spend about AUD$900, which includes tickets, accommodation, transportation, merchandise and meals, and a total of 620,000 tickets were sold for the shows of “Mildew” in Australia, so it is estimated that the injection of at least more than half a billion dollars into the total economy of Australia.

In addition, Swift’s merchandise is not only sold at the concert venue, but also online or at local stores for fans around Australia. That’s a lot of money. In other words, it’s not just Victoria and NSW that benefit, but the rest of Australia as well. At the same time last year, the average occupancy rate for Melbourne hotels was nearly 70%, but almost 90% of hotel rooms were booked over the weekend of the Swift’s concerts, with visitors coming from both inside and outside Victoria, as well as from overseas, including from New Zealand. At the same time, February was the busiest February for low-cost carrier Jetstar, a strong boost to the surrounding economy given the cost of living crisis and the fact that February is usually a tough month for the airline industry.

In recent years, concert tours have become an important social phenomenon and economic driver. In the 20 U.S. cities Swift visited on her tour, economic growth was evident. In these cities, lodging inflation rose by 2.1 percentage points, and hotel occupancy and revenues increased dramatically. Chicago, for example, saw lodging prices rise by 3.1 percentage points due to Swift’s three shows, occupancy rates increased by 8.1 percentage points, and hotel revenue per available room rose by 59 percent.

According to a new analysis by Japanese investment bank Nomura Securities, Swift’s year-long global tour has truly reinvigorated economies everywhere. From hotels to retail, her visit has undoubtedly brought about a sizable increase in spending. But at the national level, this economic effect may be overstated, meaning that the boost to the overall macro economy may not be as huge as one might expect. But there’s no denying that Taylor Swift’s stunning “Generation Tour” sent waves around the world that not only drove her fans crazy, but also gave a significant boost to the economies of the countries she visited, and the impact continues to grow.

Bridging generations

One of the most talked about names in Australia this month is undoubtedly Taylor Swift. After months of waiting, young fans went wild at the concert, showing off the friendship bracelets they’d snapped up and chanting their fan slogans. And a closer look at those who took up (expensive) stadium seats in Melbourne and Sydney showed a lot of 40-, 50- and 60-somethings singing along – and they weren’t all with children. Statistically, while 45% of Swift’s American fans are millennials – like the 34-year-old herself – 21% are Gen Xers and 25% are baby boomers. That means nearly half of her millions of fans are probably over the age of 45.

Middle-aged Swifties aren’t shy about expressing their admiration. In the U.S., Attorney General Merrick Garland, 72, incorporates Swift’s lyrics into conversations and legal arguments, and reportedly has almost all of her albums on display in his office. 56-year-old Oscar winner Julia Roberts is also so enamored with her that the first concert she took her kids to was the 2015 Swift 1989 album, “The Best of Swift. Swift’s 1989 album tour. In Australia, AMP chief economist Sean Oliver, actor Toni Collette, former Foreign Minister Julie Bishop and academic Larissa Berendt have all declared themselves Swift fans.

Taylor Swift is undoubtedly the most successful pop star in the world today, and her cultural and economic influence is overwhelming: she has more number one albums on the Billboard charts than any other woman in history, and was the most played female artist on the music streaming platform Spotify last year, with concert videos that have yet to be officially released in the United States. The concert video was a surprise hit in the U.S. before it even officially aired – with record-breaking pre-sales of more than $100 million. Numerous articles have been written online attempting to analyze why and how Taylor has made such an impact. Experts from the fields of economics, linguistics, psychology, neuroscience, and music management have tried to explain this phenomenon.

Taylor’s success may be due to the fact that her music resonates with a wide range of people. Many of Taylor’s songs tell a story in just one song: mainstream pop fans love her accessibility and catchiness, teenagers feel listened to, music fans and critics recognize her talent, and even indie/punk rock fans love her. What sets her apart from her contemporaries is her ability to constantly reinvent herself, which has led to a longer career and a wider fan base.

The Rise of Female Power

In recent years, female fans have become an increasingly visible and powerful force in many areas of pop culture, media and entertainment, with last year’s Women’s World Cup in particular providing a whole new dimension to the portrayal of women. Taylor Swift has also been a longtime advocate of female empowerment and independence, and the themes of growth, love, and self-awareness in her songs have had a profound impact on all of us.

Last June, Kenyan football star Travis Kelce said he was a fan of Swift but did not know her. Later in September, the two officially dated, and Swift attended many of Travis Kelce’s games to show her support. The number of women attending football games in the US increased dramatically, and the number of women following football games on social media skyrocketed. This year, more female fans followed Taylor Swift to the 2024 Super Bowl, and many advertisers are targeting the female Gen Z and Millennial audience. It’s fair to say that Swift’s romance has indirectly changed the advertising strategy for traditional sports in ways that were not expected. It’s hard to believe that a commercial for women’s sanitary napkins would be featured on a football telecast, but it’s surprising.

With the popularity of feminism, today’s female celebrities need to ‘wake up’ to their true selves and become better people by transcending limitations. The documentary “Ms. Americana” shows this process in its entirety: Taylor’s previous life revolved around one standard – to be perceived as a “good person” – so she waved and smiled and dieted and dieted and carefully hid her political positions. And so she smiled and dieted and lost weight and carefully hid her politics. But after a series of disputes with Kanye West, Taylor decided to stop hiding herself and made the leap to her new self by speaking out against Trump, launching a sexual harassment lawsuit, and starting to support the rights of sexual minorities.

In Taylor Swift’s music, we can feel the rise of female power and the call for freedom. She is unafraid to express her feelings and opinions, whether it be about love, friendship, or social issues, she is unafraid to use her music to speak out. From her early pop music to her recent indie albums, ‘Folklore’ and ‘Evermore’, her music style has evolved, but she has always maintained her desire for real emotion. Her music has convinced us that women can not only have their own voices, but also write their own destinies in their own way. In her amazing 17-year career, Swift has now reached the pinnacle of her economic, cultural and political influence. This has seen her soar up the Forbes list of the world’s most influential women, from 79th in 2022 to 5th last year.

 

Swift and Billy Graham

Sixty-five years ago, the famous American evangelist Billy Graham visited Australia for 15 weeks in 1959, holding large-scale evangelistic meetings around the country. It is said that close to 145,000 people attended one night at the Melbourne Cricket Ground and many lives were changed. Australia has a population of about 9 million, and about 3 million Australians attended Billy Graham’s meetings. It can be said that Billy Graham’s evangelistic meetings had an impact on the whole of Australia. By this standard, Swift was certainly no match for Billy Graham.

However, from another perspective, what people today are looking for is no different from what Australians were looking for back then, they both want to find some enlightenment in their lives. Swift’s music and songs gave the audience a little satisfaction, and the audience showed extreme fervor, does it mean that today we can no longer find a convincing direction in life from leaders or visible role models? The search for meaning is not as important today, and while Billy Graham’s message may not reach as many people as it should, Swift’s music is still influential in many ways.

 

Japan and Singapore but not Hong Kong

It is worth mentioning that only Japan and Singapore were chosen as the two places to hold concerts for the Asian dates of the Times Tour, which made many Hong Kong fans feel disappointed. It is known that the reason for choosing to hold the concert in Singapore is that the Singapore Fund subsidizes and waives the venue rent, and the Singapore National Stadium can accommodate 55,000 spectators, which is in line with the requirements of the team.

At present, concerts around the world are very popular, and many celebrities are opening mega venues. Before the Kai Tak Sports Park was built, Hong Kong did not have any competition at the moment. However, it has been reported that Swift’s team had considered holding their concerts in Hong Kong’s 40,000-capacity stadium more than a year ago, but at that time, Hong Kong was in the midst of the “Dynamic Zeroing” of the new crown, and the Hong Kong government was not very enthusiastic in offering assistance, nor was it willing to waive or reduce the venue’s rental fee, which is far less favorable than that of the Singaporean government, and thus the people of Hong Kong were not able to have a chance to meet with Swift. Now the Hong Kong government has launched to organize the claimed grand activities to revitalize Hong Kong’s economy, but has never thought of organizing an international event like Swift tour, which also shows that the relevant officials in Hong Kong, lack of international vision, failed to see Swift is a global phenomenon.

When you think of the Lionel Messi controversy that happened in Hong Kong earlier this year, maybe it’s not the best idea for a big star to skip Hong Kong. Taylor’s rise to the pinnacle of power in pop music may itself be an example of how the female experience is gradually being illuminated: the secret of the teenage heart isn’t trivial or unimportant, it’s proof of having lived as a human being, and it can be an unstoppable whirlwind of emotions that can be a huge driver of the economy.

 

Author/Editorial Department

Photo/Internet

Continue Reading

Understand the World

Two Years of Ukraine Crisis

Published

on

By

February 24th marks the second anniversary of the escalation of the crisis in Ukraine. The prolonged crisis has not only caused huge losses to the Russian and Ukrainian economies and people’s livelihoods, but has also had a serious negative impact on regional politics and security, the recovery of the world economy, global poverty reduction, food and energy security, and the ecological environment. On the 17th of February, the Ukrainian army, which is short of troops and ammunition, withdrew from the defence town of Avdeevka, which is regarded as the biggest change in the front line since May last year. At present, Russia and Ukraine are at a stalemate on the battlefield, and the tug-of-war between the two sides will continue.

 

The battle remains a stalemate

The crisis in Ukraine escalated on 24 February 2022, when Russia launched a special military operation against the country, and came at a time when the world was experiencing a three-century pandemic. The war on the front line has been virtually at a standstill for the past 14 months, with Moscow controlling nearly one-fifth of Ukraine’s territory, including the Crimean Peninsula, which it annexed in 2014. The war has caused hundreds of thousands of casualties, destroyed many cities, towns and villages, forced millions of people to leave their homes and left hundreds of thousands more living in occupied territories. Looking back at the two years since the outbreak of the crisis, the war has remained a stalemate, and the impact has continued to spill over, not only limited to the military confrontation between the two countries on the battlefield, but also extended to the game between countries and regions in the political, economic, cultural and other fields, which aggravated the evolution of the world’s pattern of the hundred years of changes, and further pushed the international strategic forces and pattern of in-depth adjustments.

At the time of the crisis, the international community generally believed that Ukraine would soon collapse, but it was met with Ukraine’s stubborn resistance, and the Biden administration of the United States immediately began to unite with its allies to provide Ukraine with a steady stream of arms and financial assistance. At the same time, unprecedented sanctions were imposed on Russia. Russia and Ukraine began to fall into a tug-of-war. In the middle of last year, the world was shocked by the Wagner incident in Russia. This made the world think that Russia was on the verge of collapse after more than a year of extremely difficult fighting, but unexpectedly, Ukraine’s counter-attack was extremely difficult, and to a certain extent, it also slowed down the assistance provided by the United States and its allies to Ukraine, and the two sides once again came to a deadlock. From October last year, when the Israeli-Palestinian conflict broke out again, the crisis in Ukraine changed again, and the Russian army started to take more ground attacks. On 17 February this year, the Russian army took full control of Avdeevka, which became another turning point.

Last Saturday, on the second remembrance of the Russian-Ukrainian War, Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, met with three other Western leaders – Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and Belgian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau – to mark the second remembrance of the Russian-Ukrainian War. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Belgian Prime Minister Alexandre De Croix arrived in Kiev at the same time. In Kiev, they emphasised Europe’s firm support for Ukraine until its “ultimate freedom” is secured. As the Russo-Ukrainian war entered its third year, the Ukrainian forces were facing increasing challenges on the front line, not only in terms of troop strength, but also in terms of weaponry and even ammunition. Commitment and firm support from the Western world at this time is undoubtedly a “shot in the arm”. During their short visit to Kiev, Meloni and Trudeau will each sign a bilateral security agreement with Zelensky. However, US President Joe Biden’s plan to provide US$60 billion in new military aid to Ukraine, although passed by the Democratic Senate, is still being shelved by the Republican House of Representatives, casting a shadow over Ukraine’s hopes to defeat the Russian army, which is superior in numbers and equipment, in battle.

Echoes of World War II

Although the Russian invasion of Ukraine was two years in the making, and the human scale of the destruction was shocking to the world, the scale of the invasion cannot be compared to World War II. However, there are various similarities between the two wars, ranging from the style of street fighting and weapons to the history and background of the times. In particular, the root cause of the two wars was a dispute over “righteousness”, a clash of ideologies, which was manifested in the real world by the financial crisis that had a devastating impact on the whole world; there was a gap of about ten years between the crisis and the outbreak of the wars, as was the case in both 1929 and 2008. Major financial crises and wars are symptomatic of deeper structural problems in society – underlying structural movements that create these cracks on the surface.

The financial crisis did bring many changes to the world, with quantitative easing relief, zero interest rates and fiscal austerity by governments to minimise the damage caused by the crisis, but at a high cost, not least in terms of inflation and the widening of the general wealth gap, which laid the groundwork for populism, extremist ideologies and social unrest. In modern wars, the trigger of World War I was the Sarajevo Incident, while the trigger of World War II was, in a sense, the Treaty of Versailles, which was too oppressive and restrictive, and severely weakened Germany, and Hitler’s ideology that led to the outbreak of the war, and the blitzkrieg attack on Poland in 1939 when Germany tore up the United Nations’ agreement, heralding the prelude to the Second World War. In the view of contemporary political and historical scholars, the Ukrainian War was a war between a democratic regime and an authoritarian regime, a war between two opposing philosophies, which involved the upholding of the norms of international relations. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is also seen by political economists as a proxy war between authoritarian capitalism and liberal capitalism.

Although Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 is considered to be the starting point of the Russo-Ukrainian War, the large-scale military invasion launched two years ago was clearly the first large-scale invasion war on the European continent after World War II, and has dominated international public opinion and become the focus of international geopolitical tug-of-war ever since its outbreak. The Kremlin has confronted the West with accusations of wanting to put NATO on Russia’s doorstep, and has been seen as claiming to be imposing its way of doing things around the world. Two years ago, it launched a “special military operation” in the hope of a lightning victory over Ukraine, but it was clear that his Putin’s ambitions had been dashed. Today, however, the balance seems to have shifted in Putin’s favour. Russia has been unanimously condemned and sanctioned by the West, and President Vladimir Putin is wanted for war crimes in international courts, but criticism from the South is rarely heard, and in the aftermath of the war, closer ties with China, Iran, and North Korea have provided Putin with diplomatic leeway and assistance in the international arena, serving as a platform for counterbalancing the West. Russia is embracing the prospect of a long war that the government believes can be sustained, and is taking advantage of the Ukrainians’ quicker depletion and the fatigue of its allies. It is difficult to say whether such a situation will allow Russia to continue to grow larger, and it is impossible to completely rule out the possibility of a wider war as a result of the friction. As in the case of World War II a hundred years ago, this is unexpected but reasonable.

 

The latest response from European countries

As a lesson learnt from the Second World War, European countries dare not be careless. After all, once Ukraine is defeated, it is hard to say that Putin will not “open his mouth wide”, and his ambition to regain the glory of the Tsarist Russia era may be on the verge of emergence, and then European countries will have to protect themselves. It is for this reason that French President Jean-Marie Macron, after meeting with more than 20 European leaders on Monday, said in his latest speech that European leaders have agreed to set up a coalition to provide Ukraine with medium-range and long-range missiles and bombs. Macron said the key to European security is to defeat Russia in Ukraine, or at least not to lose, because Europe can not afford the price. The European Union has not ruled out sending Western ground troops to Ukraine, but there are still differences between the allies. Of course, Russia is also “not willing to show weakness”, and has repeatedly warned that any deployment of Western troops in Ukraine will trigger a direct conflict between Moscow and the NATO military alliance. It seems that the situation has been brought back to the “Gordian knot” that existed two years ago, before Russia started its military conflict – NATO is the “thorn” in Russia’s side, and it is not a good idea to hit or even fight against Ukraine. NATO is a thorn in Russia’s side, and to go after Ukraine, even to the extent of fighting it, is the key to establishing its authority in the world. The war between the two sides is bound to continue, and neither side, nor the neighbouring Western countries, dare to act rashly, because a small act will often trigger an unpredictable “butterfly effect”.

 

Difficulty in opening the final chapter of peace

It has been two years since the outbreak of the Ukrainian crisis, and the aversion to war and the search for a peaceful solution have been festering around the world. At present, there are only sporadic glimmers of peace, but no clear signs of easing of the situation. Russia and Ukraine have gradually adapted to the situation. The entire Russian state has gradually turned to a wartime system, various economic indicators have rebounded, the military industry is fully supplying the front line, and the supply of troops continues to be replenished, Russia’s GDP has risen instead of declining, which is even more surprising. Despite the economic sanctions imposed on Russia by the West, Russia’s trade with China, India, Brazil, North Korea and many other countries in the Middle East is developing rapidly, forming a new pattern of world economic co-operation. In Ukraine, even though the country is in full defence mode, the majority of the population does not accept negotiations and insists on continuing the war. Although the US and its Western allies have reduced their support for Ukraine due to internal political struggles and the Gaza conflict, they will not stop their support immediately due to ideological and geopolitical factors.

The latest meeting of the European Union shows that these countries are beginning to worry that if Ukraine is defeated, Russia will become a new force dominating Europe, endangering their own survival. The three Baltic states, Finland and Sweden, which have just joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, are even more nervous about the Russian invasion. The former Soviet Union countries in Eastern Europe even believe that they will become the next target after Ukraine falls. The current situation of the Russian-Ukrainian war has made the people of these European countries support a larger-scale confrontation. Of course, Russia’s poor military performance in the past two years has also strengthened the determination and confidence of these countries to demand a war.

The Russia-Ukraine conflict is a watershed in the world’s development since the end of the Cold War and even the Second World War, and will trigger deep changes in Europe and the Eurasian region, as well as have a far-reaching impact on the future development of the world order. This war is not just a war between two countries, but the most important war in the 70 years of World War II.

 

Uncertainties

One of the great uncertainties facing the Ukrainian crisis right now is the 2024 U.S. presidential election. If Donald Trump wins the election in November and takes over the White House again, will he cut back on aid, or even change course and refuse to assist Ukraine? This huge uncertainty is a source of great concern for Ukraine and Europe. According to the information of the Kiel Institute for World Economics Research, as of January 2024, the European Union (EU) has provided Ukraine with nearly US$92 billion, while the United States has provided US$73 billion in various kinds of assistance, including arms and funds. It was only after numerous discussions and bargaining that the EU approved a US$54 billion aid program for Ukraine in February this year. However, a new US$60 billion aid program proposed by the Biden administration has not been approved due to bipartisan political differences in the US. Given the unique position of the U.S. military in the West, without the U.S., it would be difficult for Europe’s own military strength to help Ukraine counter Russia. In this sense, the outcome of the US election will likely be a key factor in determining the future course of the Ukrainian crisis.

At the moment, the chances of any meaningful talks between the two sides are slim to nonexistent. There is no sign that Putin and his followers have changed their initial goal of conquering Ukraine, and the Russian leadership seems bent on fighting to the bitter end. For both Russia and Ukraine, war remains the only option. Russia will be tenacious in its campaign of conquest. Ukraine will bravely defend itself. As long as either Russia or Ukraine fails to achieve a landslide victory in the coming months – an unlikely scenario – the war will continue. For some time to come, the crisis may be a long process of alternating hot and cold, slow and fast, with the other side shedding more blood and suffering more losses, maximising the drain on the other side’s resources, and forcing the other side to back down in a battle of wills and resilience. No one can say for sure what the outcome will be. The only thing we can say for sure is that no one on either side of the Russian-Ukrainian war is a winner.

 

Article/Editorial Sameway

Photo/Internet

 

Continue Reading

Understand the World

Aftermath of Messi’s absence from Hong Kong Friendlies

Published

on

By

On the evening of 7 February, Miami International and Kobe Victory FC played an exhibition match in Tokyo, Japan, with the much-anticipated appearance of the world’s top football star, the Argentinean god Messi, on the sidelines. The match against the Hong Kong All Stars on 4 February was the only one of the six performance matches on the tour in which Messi was absent from the Miami International team. The controversy is still festering.

Messi in China: “Cold feet”?

The popular Argentinean footballer did not play in the pre-season friendly match in Hong Kong on the 4th of this month for Miami International, leading to dissatisfaction from the sold-out crowd of 40,000 spectators. Messi claimed on 7 February that he was unable to play in Hong Kong due to a groin injury, but that night Messi, who was supposed to be a substitute, played 30 minutes in the friendly match between Japan and Kobe Victory Ship, causing a huge upset among fans and officials in China.

On the 30th day of the Lunar New Year, 9 February, the Sports Bureau of Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province, China, announced that, “for reasons that are well known” (how can you say that?), the Argentina national team’s trip to China had been cancelled. On the first day of the Lunar New Year, 10 February, the Beijing Football Association (BFA) announced that there were no plans to hold any matches in which the Argentine national team would participate. Earlier this year, the Argentine national team announced that it would play two warm-up matches in March in Beijing and Hangzhou, which would be important matches in the team’s preparation for the 2024 Copa America. Now, the plans for these two matches have basically gone out the window. This means that Messi’s matches in China have been cancelled, and the Chinese brands that Messi’s endorses will have a hard time gaining support for their brands by releasing the his image. Some commentators have said that his game is “over” in China.

But how much of an impact have these actions actually had on Messi?

 

What kind of player is Messi?

Messi, 36, was born in Argentina, of Catalan and Italian descent, and began his professional career in Argentina. As a teenager, he showed his talent by joining his local club Grandoli Juniors at the age of four, coached by his father, and moved to Spain at the age of thirteen to play for Barcelona Juniors in La Liga, where he played from 2005 to 2021, when he moved to Paris Saint-Germain, and then to the United States of America, where Messi signed for Miami in July 2023 to play in the North American League. In 2005, Messi became a Spanish national, but has continued to play for the Argentine national team.

As of August 2023, Messi has won 44 club and national championships in his career, making him the most decorated footballer of all time, with 35 coming from Barcelona, three from Paris Saint-Germain, and one from Miami International. At the international level, he has won five championships for Argentina, the U-20s and the U-23s.

His impressive record has earned him the honour of being the greatest player of all time. According to Forbes, he has amassed a net worth of more than US$620 million during his professional football career and earns an annual income of US$131 million, making him the highest-paid athlete in the world. His earnings from sports account for US$75 million, while other earnings, such as advertisements for big brands such as adidas, Ritz chips or PepsiCo, are also significant, amounting to US$55 million. He plays for Ligue 1 club Paris Saint-Germain, where he earns a staggering US$43 million a year, or US$827,000 a week, or US$8,790 an hour.

Messi had a difficult childhood and was born with congenital dwarfism and was supported by Barcelona FC to complete his development. As well as spending on luxury homes, hotels and private jets, Messi is also a generous giver of his own fortune, having partnered with UNICEF in 2007 to set up a foundation that aims to help disadvantaged children around the world. In 2017, he donated money to help build classrooms for 1,600 war orphans in Syria, saying in a statement, “Every time I see a child smile, hopeful, and full of joy, I am inspired. This legendary and caring footballer has made him a popular footballer, with nearly 500 million followers on his IG, and commercial messages worth tens of millions of dollars.

For such a rich and well-paid player, even without the sponsorship of a Chinese brand, the impact on him would be negligible. But is he the only one to be blamed for Messi not playing in Hong Kong?

The Western media, when reporting on the incident, had a very different view from the Chinese netizens.

 

Is it a case of the Hong Kong government pumping water on the cheap?

But there is a different voice in the criticism: the organisers signed a contract with MIAMI for the team competition, but not with Messi’s personal team. The contract is apparently a “cheap, non-compulsory Messi playing contract” that allows players to refuse to play if they are unwell, injured or medically unfit to play. Moreover, rumour has it that the contract amount was less than the HK$30 million offered by Miami International, which resulted in the player not being subject to the mandatory breach of contract, and thus Messi did not play. Contrary to Hong Kong’s actions, Miami International signed a high-priced compulsory attendance contract for their friendly match with Japanese professional team Kobe Satsushika on the 7th of July, so Messi had to play in the last half hour of the match, despite his leg injury.

It has also been revealed that the Hong Kong government’s previous claim that it had “cancelled” the visit of the USMNT team to the river cruise and the Kai Tak Stadium, which opened this year, was in fact due to the fact that the Hong Kong side had offered a price of HK$1 million for the participation of the USMNT team’s stars including USMNT and Uruguayan star Luis Suarez, which was not agreed upon in the end. There was a public outcry when the news broke. The price of an Instagram post by Messi alone would have been US$2.6 million, but to ask for the whole team for HK$1 million is a fool’s errand. The Saudi Arabian government invited Messi as a tourist ambassador for HK$200 million, but only asked him to participate in a few events. I believe it is only the wishful thinking of the Hong Kong government or the organisers that Messi should come to Hong Kong to play football with PR activities attached.

 

The incident was escalated to the level of “interference from outside forces”.

The official media of the Communist Party of China (CPC) has been criticizing the Messi incident in a high profile. In an article published by the Global Times on 7 February, the official media of the Communist Party of China (CPC) pointed out that the absence of Messi from the Hong Kong event could not be ruled out as a “political motivation”, and that “Hong Kong intends to build up an event economy, and there are external forces deliberately trying to use this as a means to embarrass Hong Kong”. In addition, Global People, a magazine of People’s Daily, published an article entitled “Messi’s’ Boss Linked to CIA” on 8th February, in which it was alleged that the boss of the Miami International team was linked to the US CIA. While it is understandable to be dissatisfied with Messi, it may not be wise to escalate the incident to international political criticism.

A number of Hong Kong Legislative Councillors “on behalf of” Hong Kong people have voiced their discontent with Messi on the Internet, including Fok Kai-kong, who wrote a 1,000-word article criticizing International Miami’s performance in Japan as “rubbing salt into the wounds of Hong Kong fans”; Councillor Edmond Ho Kwan-yiu, who has also repeatedly posted an article, with a photo of the draft of the 23rd Article of the Basic Law, criticizing Messi for “insulting the Chinese Government”, and who intentionally took a detour to avoid Chief Executive Eric Li Ka-chiu at the award presentation ceremony at the Hong Kong Stadium, “obviously insulting the HKSAR Government at the expense of the Chief Executive”. He also threatened that “it is not a gentleman who does not take revenge”. Regina Ip, who is also the Convenor of the Executive Council, even posted a message in English on social media platform X on the night of the Hong Kong Showdown, saying outright that “Hong Kong people hate Messi, Miami International and the masterminds behind the show because they have treated Hong Kong coldly and calculatedly”, and even pointed out that Messi should not be allowed to come to Hong Kong again. All of a sudden, all kinds of verbal and written criticisms have been escalating.

However, as an international city, Hong Kong’s repeated public speeches by government officials in the face of such a world-renowned footballer as Messi have clearly made the world look down on Hong Kong’s governing team. What is supposed to be a private commercial dispute has gone out of its way to expose the incompetence and ignorance of the governors.

As Beijing has elevated this storm to the level of political and international struggle, the organisers are forced to adopt a crisis public relations approach in order to maximise their losses. Currently, the organisers, Asian “Shangliu”, have announced a half refund to those who bought tickets through official channels and apologised again for the incident. It is not yet clear whether the refund will offset the anger of the fans in Hong Kong and mainland China. After all, the official behaviour has been elevated to the level of an ideology, and the organisers have emphasised that the absence of Messi was due to an injury, so it’s a case of the public talking to the public and the public talking to the private sector. Perhaps a refund to the fans is just the first step, and it is expected that it will take a concerted effort from the business community to reach a settlement that satisfies all parties, and we cannot rule out the possibility that compensation will eventually be required to settle the matter once and for all.

 

“Hong Kong is not what it used to be

The people and government of Hong Kong welcomed the team and the star of the show, Messi, with open arms. Miami International’s pink and black decorations and the team’s large promotional posters could be seen everywhere, and local newspapers devoted a lot of space to Messi’s visit to Hong Kong for several days in a row. However, just one day later, on 4 February, the joy dissipated and the atmosphere took a sharp turn for the worse – Messi didn’t even come off the field for one minute to play football in Hong Kong, with no smiles and no interaction, and as the captain of the team, he even stuck his pockets in his pockets to go around Hong Kong’s Chief Executive, Mr. Lee Ka Chiu, and others, and didn’t accept the award at the award presentation ceremony. It must be said that the fragile self-esteem of countless “patriots” and “pinkies” was deeply stung.

Time has changed and circumstances have changed. The fact that Miami International’s visit to China has turned from a good thing to a bad thing reflects the fact that Hong Kong is no longer in the limelight and is not valued by the people. All of this is related to the deformed political ecology of Hong Kong after the implementation of the national security law – red lines everywhere, pan-political operations, arrests day after day, even the pro-establishment Members have complained one after another about “whether it is possible to return to normalcy and not to put national security first”, but unfortunately, in return, the Chief Executive refuted it, and even upgraded it to a “soft confrontation with ulterior motives”. The programme of putting national security before everything else is causing Hong Kong to go downhill, failing to attract foreign investment, and naturally the economy will not pick up. However, Beijing and Hong Kong are still singing the same tune of “perfecting governance, emerging from governance, and restoring Hong Kong to normalcy”, which is Beijing’s political bottom line and also the slogan that Hong Kong’s Chief Executive has to abide by. There is a huge gap between the government and the people: the people know clearly that there is no such thing as restoration of normalcy, and there is no such thing as governance for the betterment of Hong Kong, but the government is still saying that Hong Kong is better than before. The failure of Messi to take the field at this point in time was undoubtedly a blow to the Hong Kong government.

In particular, the festering controversy a week or so after the match has made the international community feel ashamed. The fact that a sporting event, which should have been a contractual showpiece, has been turned into a fierce criticism of Miami International and Messi, will only lead to more foreign investment, foreign businessmen, and what Beijing calls “external forces” to bypass Hong Kong. After all, the world is a big place and you don’t have to go to Hong Kong or China. In the foreseeable future, the question may no longer be whether they will come to Hong Kong to “play the big game”, but whether they can be hired.

 

Author/Editorial Sameway

Photo/Internet

Continue Reading

Trending