The media have been a major motivating force behind the development of the contemporary literary and arts scene in the nation.
Take print media as an example. In the early days when newspapers were only 12 pages long, every daily and evening newspaper had its regular arts section, which was able to exert a far-reaching influence on the literary and arts environment. Meanwhile, television programs such as 60 Minutes, Beautiful Island (
Following the end of martial law in 1987 and the lifting of restrictions on newspapers, several of the big papers responded to the page expansion by expanding their arts sections. In addition to reporting on literary and arts events, they also covered theater, movie, music and arts reviews, and even took part in arranging film festivals, exhibitions and performing arts activities.
Suddenly, newspaper features seemed to offer an overwhelming variety of interesting stories. The coverage not only cultivated readers' appreciation for literature and the arts, but also became indispensable in fostering the development of performing arts groups.
The image of newspaper corporate culture was also improved. Those who were arts reporters back then reminisce about those days, which are often described as "the belle epoque of the arts sections."
Other than realizing the ideals of media workers, the greatest significance of this belle epoque was its ability to highlight news media's role in social education.
Unfortunately, in the wider media environment, the arts sections have never been able to break through their weaker status compared to others. The vigorous competition among print media outlets that followed the end of martial law meant that the arts sections were eventually seen as expendable window dressing, and they quickly shrank to almost nothing.
Today, arts sections in major local newspapers are continuing to shrink, and when there are major news events, these sections are naturally the first ones to be cut.
Commercial electronic media generally outsources its arts and literary news, following the "placement marketing" model, rather than taking the initiative to run disinterested news stories about arts and literature.
Compared to the chaotic situation in news and business, the arts section of a newspaper should be free of ideological conflict between the pan-green and pan-blue camps, providing readers with cultural food for thought and highlighting the innovative aspects of media.
News stories take place at the same time as we engage in our daily activities, and culture and our daily lives are closely inter-related.
Life happens every day, and so do news incidents. Why shouldn't art and literary events be given the same weight as other news events and also be reported on a daily basis?
The current situation, in which features sections are likely to be scrapped at any moment, confuses readers. Moreover, certain arts section editors use their power to turn the section into a place to vent their personal anger by attacking certain people even for the slightest and most trivial matters.
This way of handling arts and literary reports is filled with bias, and it only lowers the fairness and significance of a newspaper's arts section.
Promoting cultural affairs is of course the responsibility of the Council for Cultural Affairs, but it is also the responsibility of other government agencies, the general public, the business sector, the mass media and other sections of our society.
Currently, several media corporations have established non-profit departments that promote cultural and public welfare activities. In fact, art and literary sections and reports are themselves the best public welfare undertaking that a media outlet can be involved in and creates the most added value.
I hope that media professionals will pay close attention to the quality and quantity of art and literary reports in their publications, and continue to make a valuable contribution to the general public.
Chiu Kun-liang is the minister of the Council for Cultural Affairs.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
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