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
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under