In recent years, my study sponsored by the National Science Council has focused on the media, social capital and political trust. The basis of my hypothesis is that since the opening up of television stations in Taiwan, the plethora of TV talk shows that ensued have provided people who formerly had no way of making their opinions heard with a chance to participate in debates on public affairs, promoting the development of civil society.
However, over the last few years, we have seen talk show upon talk show appear on our TV screens, creating large numbers of celebrity hosts and guests, and this was even more apparent during the election period. But how much does this actually contribute to social capital? And has it improved political trust?
Western countries attached great importance to social capital at the end of the 20th century, with the belief that social divisions need not be resolved through violent confrontation. Instead, a democratic society should be based on the mutual trust and cooperation of everyone within the community. The media has the role of being a catalyst in this process, providing information to everyone in civil society. Therefore, even if differences do exist, conflict can be resolved by mutual trust through peaceful means, highlighting the essence of democracy.
Taiwanese cable TV news stations have gained fame and profit over the last few years, with relatively low running costs. All they need are a few SNG vans manned with low-paid youngsters right out of school, scouting the streets for anything newsworthy enough to push up their viewer ratings.
Chat shows will never be short of guests who know that sufficient exposure assures them celebrity status: you can see them every night, talking about everything and anything, desperate to come up with a fresh take on their subject.
During the election period the news channels stood to gain much from covering election rallies, but the damage this has done to social capital exceeds the benefits. The crowds that gathered outside the Presidential Office after the election added to a general feeling of foreboding and dissipated the trust that people had in certain institutions and individuals. Given this, what kind of social capital are the people of Taiwan to rely on in their quest for a civil society? And how are they to continue to put their trust in Taiwan's political institutions?
Of course, political leanings toward a particular political party or candidate are also common in the media of democratic countries in the West, but the news media should never lose sight of the principles of justice and objectivity.
Hate speech resulting from the Oklahoma blasts led to criticism and reflections within the academic world and the news media, and despite the fact that there are still echoes of it within the minority media and on the Internet, it is currently frowned upon within the mainstream media.
And the media in this country? How many political stances and demonstrations of emotion are we going to find within the newspapers? The superficiality and narrowness of the TV news, the subject matter of talk shows, together with comments by the hosts and countless guests, are all a far cry from what we should expect from the media in a civil society.
Taiwan is now at a turning point. The media have a responsibility to prevent Taiwanese society from sinking any further and put an emphasis on love and compassion. The media are, after all, a tool of society, and should publish and report more things beneficial to social capital, and restrict the reportage of any matters that could damage it.
Peng Yun is a professor in the department of journalism at the National Chengchi University.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) sits down with US President Donald Trump in Beijing on Thursday next week, Xi is unlikely to demand a dramatic public betrayal of Taiwan. He does not need to. Beijing’s preferred victory is smaller, quieter and in some ways far more dangerous: a subtle shift in American wording that appears technical, but carries major strategic meaning. The ask is simple: replace the longstanding US formulation that Washington “does not support Taiwan independence” with a harder one — that Washington “opposes” Taiwan independence. One word changes; a deterrence structure built over decades begins to shift.
Taipei is facing a severe rat infestation, and the city government is reportedly considering large-scale use of rodenticides as its primary control measure. However, this move could trigger an ecological disaster, including mass deaths of birds of prey. In the past, black kites, relatives of eagles, took more than three decades to return to the skies above the Taipei Basin. Taiwan’s black kite population was nearly wiped out by the combined effects of habitat destruction, pesticides and rodenticides. By 1992, fewer than 200 black kites remained on the island. Fortunately, thanks to more than 30 years of collective effort to preserve their remaining
After Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) met Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing, most headlines referred to her as the leader of the opposition in Taiwan. Is she really, though? Being the chairwoman of the KMT does not automatically translate into being the leader of the opposition in the sense that most foreign readers would understand it. “Leader of the opposition” is a very British term. It applies to the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, and to some extent, to other democracies. If you look at the UK right now, Conservative Party head Kemi Badenoch is
A Pale View of Hills, a movie released last year, follows the story of a Japanese woman from Nagasaki who moved to Britain in the 1950s with her British husband and daughter from a previous marriage. The daughter was born at a time when memories of the US atomic bombing of Nagasaki during World War II and anxiety over the effects of nuclear radiation still haunted the community. It is a reflection on the legacy of the local and national trauma of the bombing that ended the period of Japanese militarism. A central theme of the movie is the need, at
RSS