Lately, the hottest stories in the media have come from neither the political nor economic realms.
Since the peak of the election dispute in March and April, political polarization has caused the popularity of political news to fall. All the power struggles remain the same as before -- and the more you watch this kind of news, the more annoying it gets, so you are better off watching less of it.
But what about economic and financial news? Every investor has heard it said that the economy's fundamentals are great, but foreign investors still keep pulling their money out of the local markets and the TAIEX keeps on falling.
The more business news you watch, the less you understand. Signs of an improving stock market are nowhere in sight and you would do better
not wasting more time trying to understand why.
So with political and economic events in the news less often, sensational news is what attracts audiences: kidnappings, shootouts between police and criminals, family suicides, incest, cannibalism, mistreatment of foreign brides and so on. The picture painted in the media is one of a society in chaos.
The problem is that the media do not tell the public whether statistics show that crime is increasing.
Statistics from the National Police Agency reveals that violent crimes and other criminal cases decreased across the board between January and last month compared to the same period last year. The decrease applies to murder, kidnapping for ransom, robbery causing serious injury, intimidation aimed at extorting money and rape.
Of course, this does not eliminate the possibility that police swept some cases under the rug around the time of the election because they were busy with other duties.
It is also possible that the number of criminal cases suddenly increased beginning this month, although that possibility is not very high.
All in all, social order cannot possibly be deteriorating at the rate that the media's reports would lead you to believe.
Media outlets produce a
product, and consumer demand determines what sort of news will sell the most. Demand is in turn stimulated by advertising and marketing on the part of the sellers (in this case, the media outlets). Although marketing is becoming increasingly reliant
on specialized and scientific surveys, a more likely scenario in the media is that sellers have realized that sales figures for a certain product are going down and therefore have decided to test a different product.
And they've had success. Now that they are providing consumers "social" stories, audiences have been reacting passionately. And so the media of course continues to focus on these "social" stories.
Why do consumers of the media demand this sort of material? Naturally, we cannot draw any conclusions without statistical research, but I feel quite
certain that the uneasy social atmosphere that has followed the presidential election has something to do with it.
Maybe the extreme antagonism brought on by the election has made some people manic-depressive, and has awoken
the bloodthirsty beast in man. Perhaps watching tragic and violent social news has become a way for audiences to let off some steam.
From another perspective, we also see how the news that is peddled by the media includes an element of mutual social support and self-redemption: tragic
descriptions of the families of deceased police officers, emotionally stirring descriptions of school children in remote areas, old people unable to support themselves, multi-generational households, sexually abused people, all together with the bank accounts of people in need of assistance. These stirring images are shown alongside descriptions of blood and violence.
These reports could be seen as a redemption ritual meticulously planned by the media to
let audiences -- often left feeling frustrated and powerless by a political and economic environment they cannot change, and after having seen some shocking violent scene that aroused their sympathy and compassion -- take concrete action by helping tragic and helpless weaker groups that are worse off than themselves.
This redemption ritual brings a measure of balance to the powerless and frustrated.
It could be said that this kind of redemption comes cheaply and without effort, and it could also be questioned whether such actions will change the world.
But what we see in this ritual is not simply a wish to see violence in order to find an outlet for one's own thirst for blood. We also see the motives behind the attempts by many individuals to achieve absolution and
to find the innate goodness of people.
These motives and the innate goodness of people are the forces that make the redemption of society at large possible.
Take the issue of military purchases, for example: Although we see the two politically opposed camps use it as an excuse to engage in a deplorable struggle, we also see how individuals and groups with different political orientations are willing to consider the values and development of society.
This force for social soul-searching and search for
absolution could transcend
political struggles and economic bickering.
If that happened, we would no longer have to stoop to watching social violence. This is the social foundation for improving this country.
Ku Er-teh is a freelance writer.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers