On Dec. 4, the China Times ran a front-page story that President Chen Shui-bian (
First, was the story subjected to the established reporting procedures of truly professional journalists before publication? According to the editorial desk's explanation the next day, "the newspaper cross-checked the story with various sources. But the confirmation was incomplete, because the paper failed to verify the allegation with Chen or appropriate presidential staff in a timely manner."
The media can be more confident about the accuracy of information when it is confirmed by at least two sources. However, reporters are not always able to complete laborious confirmation work before deadlines. As a result, they have to depend on the reliability of their sources, as well as their own understanding of the story. Mistakes are inevitable under such circumstances. In this case, the paper verified the story with various sources. But it did not obtain a comment from Chen and without it the report was not balanced.
The report referred only to reliable sources and insiders. Is it appropriate not to name sources? Reporters should name sources in the interests of their own cred-ibility as well as their accountability. Still, when a story is sensitive, it's perfectly normal for reporters to protect their sources. Undoubtedly, some reporters may use the protection of sources as a pretext to hide their laziness and irresponsibility, but the occasional genuine need to protect sources cannot be ignored. Nor can it be presumed that a report in which a source is not identified is necessarily incorrect.
Did the newspaper itself play the role of gatekeeper? This role is crucial to the way in which a story is presented. The process can also reduce mistakes, although it's difficult to avoid personal biases and structural distortion. More importantly, through repeated checks and discussions, journalists can reduce the possible political, economic, social or legal impact of a report.
Third is the media's own news judgment, which determines the value that the public places in a report. The more valuable a news piece is, the more noticeable a position it occupies. Editorial desks should stick to their guns once they have decided to run as front-page leads -- after thorough confirmation and evaluation -- reports making grave charges.
In the name of truth and the media's duty to monitor the government, journalists must strive to get to the bottom of this story.
Ku Lin-lin is an associate professor of journalism at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US