I feel flattered to be singled out for editorial comment by the Taipei Times ("Su Chi shoots the messenger," Nov. 10, page 8).
Unfortunately, somehow, I also feel that the editorial writer probably did not read my info sheet distributed at the press conference of Nov. 8, but solely based his judgment on the page 1 report of the following day ("English-language press not reporting KRTC scandal," Nov. 9, page 1).
On the info sheet, I specifically pointed out that the news of the arrest of Tu Shi-san (杜十三), a poet who threatened to kill Premier Frank Hsieh (謝長廷), was placed on the front page of all four of Taiwan's Chinese-language dailies -- the Apple Daily, the Liberty Times, the United Daily News and the China Times.
Yet they were "not treated at all by Taipei Times and Taiwan News." I made a mistake by not noting the small "quick takes" story on page 3 on the same day and I apologized immediately and on the spot after the press conference to the Taipei Times reporter.
But my point remains the same and valid. That is, some English-language newspapers, while attempting to cater to the needs of its readers, are not necessarily recording and reflecting the issues and feelings of most people in Taiwan. Otherwise, the treatment of the same story would not be so glaringly different.
I also offered another example in the info sheet which was not reported at all in the Taipei Times and perhaps remains unknown to its readers to this day. In August this year, the Chen administration announced that the investigation into the March 19 shooting incident was closed and the "assassin" of President Chen was found -- and was dead. A China Times poll showed only 19 percent of Taiwan people "believe" the government version. The rest "do not believe" or "do not know." The Taipei Times did not report this poll at all, as many other did. Only its editorial, to its credit, mentioned it in passing, but attributed it to the bias of "pan-blue media."
Third, again on my info sheet, I mentioned that the Kaohsiung Rapid Transit Corp (KRTC) and other scandals were treated uniformly lightly by the Taipei Times. I said that major reports appeared only after President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) apologized to the nation on Oct. 29. The fact that the full-page special report which was cited by your editorial appeared only on Nov. 7 supports my argument.
I often fault Taiwan's Chinese-language media, printed or electronic, for being too sensational and politically tainted. One thus places greater hope in the English-language newspapers to be more balanced and up to the "normal" standard of democratic countries. More importantly, the domestic politics of Taiwan are so volatile and yet so crucial that it sometimes threatens to "wag two dogs with one tail," so to speak. A comprehensive understanding of Taiwan by the international community is becoming essential to many elites abroad.
English-language newspapers, such as the Taipei Times, are thus important windows for Taiwan's communication with other countries and peoples. For them to fall into the rhetorical and one-sided pattern of their Chinese-language sisters is not only saddening for a democracy-believer but alarming for our national security because it may skew perceptions and calculations abroad. If the outside world misjudges about Taiwan, they are bound to be surprised again and again. And worse, we in Taiwan may suffer more from their misjudgment.
The KMT (Chinese Nationalist Party) which I represent indeed had an authoritarian past. But we bade farewell to that "tradition" in the mid-1990s. As the first Government Information Office (GIO) director-general serving after the direct popular presidential election of 1996, I am proud to say on record that I and my GIO colleagues during my term in office never made one request or demand to any newspaper or TV station, asking for reportorial or editorial change. I am sure the Taipei Times editor at the time could testify to that [Editor's note: Su Chi headed the GIO in 1996 and 1997, but the Taipei Times was not founded until 1999]. Much less would we have done than what is being done to TVBS lately.
Su Chi
Taipei
Editor's note: The Taipei Times regrets the fact that Su Chi has failed to address the reason the editorial was written, namely his carefully worded accusation at the press conference and in his handout that the government is exerting improper pressure on the Taipei Times [the word he used was caokong (操控), to "manipulate"] and that we are avoiding stories that would embarrass the Chen administration. We can only assume that the absence of this spurious claim in Su's letter is a concession that the accusation was indeed capricious or, at best, ill-informed. As for our coverage of the KRTC scandal and mistreatment of Thai laborers, which started in earnest long before Chen issued his apology, we stand by the dedication and impartiality of our reporters and invite readers to judge the content and timing of the stories for themselves on our Web site.
The Comedy Club on Fuxing N Road in Taipei was vandalized with paint bombs mixed with feces on May 29, allegedly because one of its performers had satirized Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). The incident has triggered concerns about the growing threat from China’s cross-border repression within Taiwan. On the day of the attack, a comedian surnamed Huang (黃), who is known for mocking Xi, was the headline performer. The Comedy Club founder said the assault was obviously politically motivated. China, which Freedom House said “conducts the most sophisticated, extensive and far-reaching campaign of transnational repression in the world,” has
China’s Taiwan Affairs Office spokesperson Zhu Fenglian (朱鳳蓮) at a press conference last week repeated the same, tired line, claiming that Taiwan’s future should be “decided jointly by the more than 1.4 billion Chinese people, including Taiwan compatriots.” The statement is absurd. Virtually every word is incorrect, with some parts mistaken to an astonishing degree. First, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never included Taiwan. When the Republic of China’s (ROC) original five-colored flag was established in 1912, Taiwan was still under Japanese rule. When the PRC was founded in 1949, Taiwan was under the control of president Chiang
Following the outbreak of conflict in Iran, TikTok was flooded with videos targeting Taiwanese users. Many featured artificial intelligence (AI)-generated anchors posing as Taiwanese broadcasters with localized traditional Chinese subtitles. The videos warned of imminent social collapse due to liquefied natural gas shortages, blamed the Democratic Progressive Party and its alleged failed energy policies for a fabricated crisis, and used recycled footage from unrelated events to create the impression Taiwan stood on the edge of systemic breakdown. By saturating the information environment with falsehoods or selectively edited material designed to trigger emotional responses, malign actors can exploit cognitive vulnerabilities and
Taiwan’s leading position in the global semiconductor industry is not, as some claim, based on misconceptions, a result of “stealing.” It was built upon formal, transparent and costly technology transfer agreements between the Taiwanese government and US enterprises half a century ago. According to the oral history of Hu Ding-hua (胡定華), a pioneer in Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, the origin of Taiwan’s integrated circuit (IC) technology dates back to the “IC pilot factory” in the 1970s. The implementation of this project fully complied with international commercial standards and legal procedures. First, the project completed formal contract signing and payment. In 1975,
RSS