Several respected figures such as choreographer Lin Hwai-min (
The truth is that all major media outlets have become so deeply involved in the domestic political wrangling that their objectivity is frequently open to question. And to promote their political agenda, some have resorted to fabricating or running unverified stories as front-page news or broadcasting hearsay.
Media outlets are entitled to their own political stance -- as long as they are kept within the editorial and opinion pages, and not masquerading as fact-based, objective news articles.
A glance at a few recent examples shows just how much the local media need to change their work ethics before any more damage is done to the country's fourth estate.
The Chinese-language United Daily News on Aug. 18 ran a front-page story alleging that the president's son-in-law, Chao Chien-ming (
The report, quoting anonymous sources in the jewelry industry, went on to claim that after being released on bail last month, Chao had asked a friend to sell the diamond at a lower price, implying that Chao meant to flee the country.
Threatened with a libel suit by Chao, the paper later issued an apology for failing to verify the facts before running the story.
Something similar also happened not long ago when the Chinese-language China Times published a front-page story alleging that Freddy Lim (
How do these incidents compare with how the international press operates?
Consider Reuters news agency's decision to fire a freelance photographer when it discovered that one of the photographs he took in Beirut had been manipulated using Photoshop software to show more and darker smoke rising from buildings in the aftermath of an Israeli airstrike.
Or, veteran newsman Dan Rather's decision to quit as anchor of CBS Evening News after coming under fire for a contentious and disputed report about US President George W. Bush's military service.
Irresponsible reporting not only misleads the public but also harms those in the media who take their jobs seriously and who are concerned about the image and reputation of the country's press.
In the end it's the public that suffers. Pity the readers and viewers who let their blood pressure rise over a fabricated story.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
RSS