The National Communications Commission (NCC) has given its approval to a transfer of stocks in the Broadcasting Corp of China (BCC), a decision that displeased the Cabinet.
Ownership restrictions are crucial in determining whether the media environment will improve or deteriorate further. The central issue of the transfer should not be turned into a weapon in the fight between political parties.
The commission has not published its investigation into the viability of the transfer and it based its decision on the promises of the buyer rather than on a substantive review.
This is unacceptable. We appeal to the commission to immediately publish the contents of its investigation, hold a public hearing and reconsider its approval of the transfer of BCC shares.
In late January, suspicions rose that former UFO Radio chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康) was planning to take over the shares using four front companies. There were also claims that the firms were undercapitalized, questions about where the stated capital came from and other problems. The NCC reacted by saying that apart from demanding that the party concerned fix these problems, it would start an investigation together with the Investment Commission and the Financial Supervisory Commission. At that time, the NCC was handling the case in a suitable way.
But after waiting five months, we still haven't heard if the four firms were real companies. If the NCC had arrived at a judgment based on months of investigations, why should the party concerned need to be guaranteeing anything?
The NCC has also yet to publish the results of another investigation it has been conducting for six months. That probe was to answer questions such as whether the four companies were front companies, what the source of their investment capital was and whether this would result in a media monopoly. The public has a right to know, and the NCC should publish the results as soon as possible to gain the public's trust.
The BCC's promises that political parties, the government and the military would withdraw from the media and that there would be no investment from China, Hong Kong or other overseas investors are an entirely inappropriate basis for the NCC to approve a transfer. This is just as absurd as, say, the abolition of driving tests and traffic violation data. It is like making someone sign a document saying: "I promise I will not break any rules," and then give them a driving license without a second glance.
The withdrawal of political parties, the government and the military from media operations and a block on foreign investment in the broadcasting industry are all clearly specified in legislation. The question of whether the transfer of BCC shares to the four companies allegedly related to Jaw is legal should be investigated by the NCC -- as the authority in charge -- on its own initiative and be based on evidence. How then can they base their approval on verbal or written promises by a party that it will not break the law?
As to influence from cross-media ownership accumulating for one person, the NCC believed a promise that a shareholding in UFO Radio held by Jaw's wife, Liang Lei (
According to Clause 18 of the Enforcement Rule of the Broadcasting and Television Law (
On the issue of a media monopoly, letters containing arguments for and against the transfer that NCC spokesman Howard Shyr (
The combined coverage of the two broadcasting networks is more than 20 percent, the audience in all areas varies between 20 percent and 50 percent, and they get more than 30 percent of commercials. The BCC, for a very long time, has also had the most analog radio frequencies. From these numbers it is clear that the moment the transfer was approved, a monopoly resulted.
Pan-blue and pan-green-camp politicians should not obscure the seriousness of this problem for their political ends. When approving such a large transfer of media shares, the BCC should conduct substantial research and not take lightly the task that the public has entrusted it with.
Lo Shih-hung is founder of the Campaign for Media Reform. Chad Liu is an assistant professor in the Department of Communications at National Chung Cheng University.
Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
In the past month, two important developments are poised to equip Taiwan with expanded capabilities to play foreign policy offense in an age where Taiwan’s diplomatic space is seriously constricted by a hegemonic Beijing. Taiwan Foreign Minister Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) led a delegation of Taiwan and US companies to the Philippines to promote trilateral economic cooperation between the three countries. Additionally, in the past two weeks, Taiwan has placed chip export controls on South Africa in an escalating standoff over the placing of its diplomatic mission in Pretoria, causing the South Africans to pause and ask for consultations to resolve
An altercation involving a 73-year-old woman and a younger person broke out on a Taipei MRT train last week, with videos of the incident going viral online, sparking wide discussions about the controversial priority seats and social norms. In the video, the elderly woman, surnamed Tseng (曾), approached a passenger in a priority seat and demanded that she get up, and after she refused, she swung her bag, hitting her on the knees and calves several times. In return, the commuter asked a nearby passenger to hold her bag, stood up and kicked Tseng, causing her to fall backward and
In December 1937, Japanese troops captured Nanjing and unleashed one of the darkest chapters of the 20th century. Over six weeks, hundreds of thousands were slaughtered and women were raped on a scale that still defies comprehension. Across Asia, the Japanese occupation left deep scars. Singapore, Malaya, the Philippines and much of China endured terror, forced labor and massacres. My own grandfather was tortured by the Japanese in Singapore. His wife, traumatized beyond recovery, lived the rest of her life in silence and breakdown. These stories are real, not abstract history. Here is the irony: Mao Zedong (毛澤東) himself once told visiting
When I reminded my 83-year-old mother on Wednesday that it was the 76th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China, she replied: “Yes, it was the day when my family was broken.” That answer captures the paradox of modern China. To most Chinese in mainland China, Oct. 1 is a day of pride — a celebration of national strength, prosperity and global stature. However, on a deeper level, it is also a reminder to many of the families shattered, the freedoms extinguished and the lives sacrificed on the road here. Seventy-six years ago, Chinese Communist leader Mao Zedong (毛澤東)
RSS