At first overlooked because of all the fuss over Iraq (there is a war going on, you know), it seems that English TV news has now become an issue in Taiwan.
Curiously, the debate is not among we "foreign residents" that are supposed to be the core audience for these broadcasts. A survey of the popular Forumosa Web site shows that there is still a decided dearth of debate about the broadcast blunders.
That strikes me as strange, considering that the sins against the English language are being committed in the name of said foreigners -- and with their tax money.
Instead, the debate over bad broadcasting is taking place in the legislature and on Chinese-language radio stations.
As you may or may not know, there are two new TV news programs in English. One is on CTS, the other on Formosa TV. CTS is known for its strong connections to the KMT, while Formosa is decidedly DPP. Another station, TTV, has been doing English news for some time now, but curiously seems to be left out of the current debate.
Key to the debate is the fact that CTS is getting NT$10 million from the Government Information Office (GIO) to produce the programs. The other stations were among those who tried to get the GIO contract, but lost out. ("English newscasts to battle it out," March 16, page 17).
A few weeks ago, the National Educational Radio program Media Watch asked listeners to call in with their views about the two new programs. The programs are, apparently, relatively popular among the Taiwanese. But what about the foreigners?
The one foreign listener who did call in said that he and his friends were initially curious about the news programs, but gave up after less than a week because they were so bad. Most of them stopped watching after 10 minutes and switched over to Friends (or was that Fraser?)
Chief among the caller's complaints was that the English was largely unintelligible. On Formosa you could try to match the English subtitles to what the reporters were saying, but on CTS you were left shaking your head and saying to yourself, "What?"
In fact, the caller said, his five-year old kindergarten students could speak better English.
Apparently, the caustic caller was not the only one who had a problem with the precarious programs. Shortly after the call-in show, DPP Legislator Wang Tuoh (
Wang had a litany of complaints. The CTS programs, Wang pointed out, were supposed to be for the foreign community -- but foreigners weren't watching.
The broadcasts were supposed to provide "an English environment" for Taiwanese people, but the English was so substandard that just "Chinglish" would be a godsend. These programs were supposed to improve Taiwan's international profile, instead they were an embarrassment.
Why then, asked Wang, was CTS -- a private station -- being given NT$10 million in government money to produce an inferior program?
One possible answer appeared in this newspaper in the form of a letter from Michelle Lee (
That letter strongly suggested that CTS got the GIO contract not because of professional merit, but because of politics and nepotism: that the old guard at the GIO had handed the prize to a well-connected station that employed the daughter of one of the judges.
Obviously stung by such criticisms, the GIO responded with its own letter (Letters, April 5, page 8). Naturally, it denied allegations of nepotism.
"Professionalism was an important consideration in the making of our decision," wrote Su Ruey-ren (蘇瑞仁), director of the Domestic Information Office at the GIO. "Providing balanced, complete news reports was another."
But, apparently, producing a program in intelligible English -- one that foreigners would actually watch -- was not.
?
Stephen Nelson is a part time broadcaster and journalist.
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing