Recent media coverage of a series of political events has clearly, crudely and sadly illustrated the double standards that are applied to pan-green and pan-blue politicians.
The pro-China media in Taiwan enjoys a disproportionate presence in the local news market -- this much everyone knows. But their biased and selective reporting in such a brazen manner has become almost sickening.
Take the coverage of pan-blue legislators' sensational allegations against first lady Wu Shu-jen (
With the pro-China media so eager to dance to the pan-blue camp's tune, it seemed as if Wu was Taiwan's version of Imelda Marcos.
Sure, Wu has drawn much criticism for her investment activities. And given her position as first lady, she should have known better than to engage in commercial activities or meet with the executives of state-owned enterprises. Such conduct was, at the very least, stupid.
However, the critical -- some would say libelous -- coverage of Wu was out of all proportion to her alleged misdeeds, especially when compared with coverage of the KMT. The KMT's stalled deal last December to sell the party's three media outlets to the China Times Group has recently been clouded in controversy. Originally the China Times Group wanted to buy all three outlets from the KMT; now it seems they don't have the money to do so.
The whole thing smells like a sweetheart deal for one of the KMT's pro-China media pals. Naturally enough, KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
And then there was the news earlier this week that a number of Ma's Taipei City Government staff took more than 30 days of official leave to prepare for a Dragon Boat race. Had this happened while President Chen Shui-bian (
But Ma, the media darling, was able to work his way out of the controversy with the response: "The city government is keen to promote the concept of a health-conscious city."
"Clean" and "transparent" were the catchwords of Ma's campaign for the KMT chairmanship last June. How much "cleanliness" and "transparency" has he really implemented since then? And how much attention has the nation's media been paying to this matter? The short answer to both questions is: not very much.
The KMT recently announced that its vice chairwoman Lin Cheng-chih (林澄枝) would be stepping down, with the vacancy to be filled by Legislator Chang Jen-chian (章仁香). Many members of the KMT's Central Standing Committee -- supposedly the highest decision-making body of the party -- weren't even aware that the appointment had been made. So much for Ma's transparency.
The media have a responsibility to keep the powerful in check. If the pro-China media really want Ma to win the 2008 presidential election, what they ought to do, for the sake of the country's welfare, is keep him to his word.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
RSS