No apology necessary
After watching Chu Mei-feng (
According to the Taipei Times' coverage, Chu said, "I kept bad company and erred. I feel deeply ashamed for causing such an uproar in society," and then collapsed ("Chu gives apology for having `erred,'" Dec. 26, page 1).
At first, I dismissed her post-apologetic fainting spell as cynical theatrics. But considering the depth of betrayal and violation she must be feeling, I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt. Imagine having your sex life plastered on computer and TV screens nationwide! The stress must surely be unbearable.
But the real question is why Chu should feel any guilt at all. Shame goes without saying, but guilt? No. The worst that can be said of her is that she had sex with a married man. But Chu herself is single. It was the man who broke his marriage vows, not Chu. Although it's considered "immoral" for a woman to have sex with a married man, we do not know how the man represented himself to her.
Perhaps he gave her the tired old line about his marriage being "on the rocks" or "all over with except for the paperwork." In any case, it was the man who "erred." Chu's only error was being perhaps too trusting of those around her -- those who eventually betrayed her, and exposed her most intimate feelings to be publicly ripped apart by a feeding frenzy of media sharks.
I sincerely hope that the perpetrators of this outrage will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, to put Taiwan's ravenous media on notice: such despicable acts of so-called "journalism" will not be tolerated!
Chu Mei-feng does not owe the people of Taiwan an apology. It is the people of Taiwan who should apologize to Chu. For without our insatiable appetite for scandal, perhaps this ordeal could have been avoided.
I'm glad to see that the Taipei Times is following developments in the investigation. This is an important case, with the potential to set a strong and clear legal precedent against "blue" journalism -- and in support of individual privacy. And clearly, Taiwan could use such a precedent.
John Diedrichs
Taipei
Chu gets excess coverage
Do you realize that not a single Chinese-language paper ran Chu Mei-feng on the front page Dec. 27? But the Taipei Times did, and added a second story inside for good measure!
When you have less than three pages and a dozen or so reporters to cover all the news of the entire country, do you want to waste your space like this?
How serious a crime is secret videotaping? Is it more serious than murder? Kidnapping? Rape? Arson? Espionage? Corruption? Vote-buying? Were there no suspects detained in other criminal cases this week? If there were, how come they have not appeared on the front page?
I personally have begun to suspect that Chu may have done this herself. If that seems unnecessarily conspiratorial, consider: why would someone who is supposedly concerned about her privacy hold a nationally televised news conference?
Consider also that she waited to do so until the story had begun to slip off the front pages, and moreover that she had nothing new to say. This is the act of a desperately publicity-hungry individual.
Consider as well the fact that her career (it is also worth asking how important she could be as an unemployed former city councilor of a now-defunct political party) got its first major boost when she secretly filmed somebody else in a similarly compromising position.
Since she possesses the technical skills and a craving for publicity, there is at least a prima facie case for including her on the list of suspects, perhaps at the top of the list. One can certainly imagine that the media would be nervous about reporting this line of reasoning, since it would imply gross lapses of judgment by almost all the news editors in the country. As of today, the Taipei Times has started to outdo all the other newspapers in this department. Congratulations! Perhaps Chu will reward you with an exclusive interview.
Bo Tedards
Taipei
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with