Print

Mail

wiki links

Society has a key role to play in reforms

The opposition between the pan-green and pan-blue camps has diverted the focus away from the important broadcasting issues involved in the TVBS dispute.

For example, to what extent does the state control the media market? What is the basis of the government's legitimacy for such control? How is such control restricted? What is the intent behind the restrictions on foreign ownership of the media? What does press freedom entail, and what are the media's responsibilities?

These questions are not straightforward matters. They have to be decided through rational public discussion to build mutual understanding and achieve consensus.

Both camps are incapable of self-examination and are unaware of -- or deliberately ignoring -- the limitations to their own discourse. Worse, politicians are making sensational statements in the media only to further their own narrow agendas. They seek to hog the limelight with harsh words emphasizing the zero-sum logic of "I'm right, he's wrong." Do such politicians' unswerving supporters understand their ulterior motives? In this seesaw battle, the gap between the two camps is growing ever wider.

Fortunately, we can see a ray of hope shining, and feel a faint gust of fresh air. A social force is moving at the grassroots level, progressing quietly and steadily. Although this force is not very influential and lacks political support, it is advancing steadily. Some social groups are beginning to explore broadcasting ethics and their implementation.

In August, civil groups organized the Citizens' Coalition for Media Reform to demand that the media engage in dialogue with the general public, and to get the two political camps to together set rules to be used as a reference when reviewing broadcast license applications. Some civil groups will hold public work meetings to discuss media reports and human rights issues. These groups are trying to resolve the social deadlock and build a foundation for an ethical media.

Of course, obstacles remain. One could question whether civic groups will be able to overcome the green-blue divide. And one could be skeptical of how much political clout these organizations will really have. Manipulation by political parties has resulted in the membership of the soon-to-be-established National Communications Commission (NCC) being decided based on the parties' proportional representation in the legislature. This may well restrict the power of civic organizations even further.

But there is hope. Civic organizations can still use strategic means to break through these restrictions. First, civic groups are able to see beyond factional disputes. Once civic organizations have reached a consensus, they should jointly demand that the consensus be implemented by the media, political parties and the government.

Second, civic organizations can increase their strength by widening their base of social support. Furthermore, civic organizations can also demand that avenues for participation in policymaking be put in place. They could demand that the NCC answer to the public, that it be subject to investigation, that its operations be transparent and that it organize regular public hearings. Through these channels, civic organizations would get access to information, be able to fully participate in debate and submit proposals.

The public is the master of society. Hopefully, this fresh and positive force will continue to progress, despite the smoke-screens thrown up by politicians of all stripes. In that way they will help build better communication and lead the direction of reform.

Lin Lih-yun is an assistant professor in the department of journalism and communications at Fu Jen Catholic University.

Translated by Perry Svensson
This story has been viewed 1231 times.