On Jan. 3, the legislature finally passed the Statute Regarding the Disposition of Government Shareholdings in the Terrestrial Television Industry (無線電視事業公股處理條例). This legislation is vital to eliminate partisan, political and military control of the media. The dispute over media ownership -- a relic of the party-state era -- was thus resolved. However, does this signal a rejuvenation of Taiwan's media?
In accordance with the provisions for the disposition of government shareholdings and the policies of the related agencies, the withdrawal of government and military capital from the Taiwan Television Enterprise (TTV) and the Chinese Television System in the near future will see the former becoming a private station, and the latter a public one. Meanwhile, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) recently sold China Television Company, the Broadcasting Corporation of China and the Central Motion Pictures Corp to the China Times Group. As a result of these moves, commercial interests are likely to be preponderant in Taiwan's media. The establishment of the proposed public media group still awaits the drawing up of government policy and the necessary legislative amendments before it can come into existence, so it is certainly worth asking whether there is any danger of Taiwan's media environment becoming the monopoly of a small number of private interests.
The statute will initiate the government's withdrawal from the local terrestrial television stations. In accordance with the law, the Cabinet has to form a share transfer committee within 20 days, which will be responsible for transferring all public shares to either the Public TV Service Foundation or the private sector. As for the Council for Hakka Affairs' Hakka TV and the Overseas Chinese Affairs Commission's TAIWAN Macroview TV, the Public TV Service Foundation will be responsible for producing their programming from the second half of this year.
By that time, the single-channel Public Television Service (PTS) will have become a public TV group, producing high-quality popular programs according to the needs of different groups. The expanded TV group will be allowed to air commercials in order to support itself. But greater financial support from the government is still necessary to enable it to compete with foreign public TV groups in terms of scale and quality of production. To ensure stable financial backing, organization and personnel operations, those in power have to propose a macro blueprint for the group, and make substantial amendments to the Public Television Law (公共電視法).
On the other hand, although the KMT sold its three media assets and seemingly withdrew from the industry, this is still a long way from being a substantial reform of the media. Media resources are considered public in nature. Under the principle of fairness and justice in a democratic era, the party should return its ill-gotten resources to the public. Thus, it should return its broadcasting frequencies, donate its assets and retreat from the media. But this was not what happened. Instead, the KMT chose to sell the three media companies and earned NT$5.8 billion (US$180.5 million) in the process. What will the self-proclaimed reformist KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) do with the money?
What is of even more concern is that the KMT sold its three media assets to the China Times Group. The China Times Group had already expanded its hold on the terrestrial television industry by buying CTiTV in 2002, forming a multimedia group that encompasses newspapers, magazines and satellite and terrestrial television stations. Thus the most recent acquisitions would seem to be in contravention of the Broadcasting and Television Act, which places restrictions on media ownership. As Article 19 of the Implementation Regulations of the Broadcasting and Television Act clearly states: "The application [for ownership transfer] shall not be approved if the transferee, individually or in combination with related businesses, holds more than 50 percent of the total shares of a newspaper or terrestrial radio/television business."
Does the China Times Group hold over half of the total shares of a newspaper or terrestrial radio or television business? The group must answer this question honestly and the authorities must look into the matter to see whether the deal was legal.
In the aftermath of the sell-off of KMT media interests, the biggest worry for Taiwan is the centralization of multimedia ownership. What good is replacing partisan, political and military interests in the media with conglomerates? When TTV releases its shares to the private sector in the future, the reviewing committee formed by the ruling and opposition camps must control the process strictly.
The concentration of media ownership has been seen to be detrimental to the public interest in the US and the same thing has now occurred in Taiwan's cable TV industry.
The National Communications Commission has been established to handle the issue of restrictions on media ownership. It will be this commission's responsibility to maintain the balance between development, efficient operation and the public interest.
Hung Chen-ling is an assistant professor in the Graduate Institute of Journalism at National Taiwan University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
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
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
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath