Much discussion about the recent TVBS controversy has ignored the distinctions between media values, freedom of the press, politics and the law.
The TVBS storm started with the revelation of a photograph. It is the duty of the media to reveal misconduct and this attempt at doing so should be applauded. The photograph alone, however, is not enough to prove conclusively any misconduct by the people shown.
Guests on TV shows have gone too far in drawing conclusions concerning who is implicated. On such occasions, the media should act as gatekeepers and work to offer a balanced picture, in order to maintain their neutrality. They should also strive to maintain their role as observers instead of goading participants or jumping in to stir things up.
An opinion voiced by a guest on a TV show falls within the scope of freedom of speech. But when that information is disseminated by a media outlet it becomes protected by the freedom of the press. We all enjoy freedom of speech, but only those privileged groups who have the power to use the media are protected by freedom of the press. They often operate media outlets and hold high social positions. As a result, placing press freedom before all else simply becomes protection of media hegemony.
Furthermore, the Broadcasting and Television Law (
It is inappropriate for TVBS to say that such an investigation cannot be carried out since the broadcasting license has already been issued. Intervention is possible whenever illegal actions are discovered. After all, a drug addict cannot say that, "I've been taking drugs for years. You didn't investigate me before, so you cannot investigate me now."
TVBS also says that its license can only be withdrawn following the establishment of the national communications commission. Until the commission is established, however, the GIO remains the agency in charge. Not taking action would be tantamount to dereliction of duty.
The question of whether or not TVBS has broken the law should be determined by the authorities. In future, there will also be other ways to obtain judicial remedy. Opposition leaders and legislators join the calls against the GIO because they smell blood. Calls for street protests and recalling the president if TVBS' license is cancelled is simply a matter of letting political interests take precedence over the law.
In the same way, President Chen Shui-bian's (
The government must not suppress the media. That would mark a return to authoritarian politics. For their part, politicians and the media must not set a bad example by letting their disregard for the law take precedence over the law itself.
The revelation of misconduct must not turn into sentencing via the media, and freedom of the press must not be allowed to override all else. To enjoy freedom of the press, we must first take a square look at social responsibility.
Cheng Tzu-leong is a professor in the department of advertising at National Chengchi University.
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