The decision by Taichung prosecutors last week to indict TVBS reporters Chang Yu-kun (
The higher-ups at TVBS have claimed that they were in the dark throughout the incident. But while managers may not have been aware that their own reporters had helped film the video, they certainly could not have been unaware of its content.
At the heart of the matter is ambiguity over whether the real crime committed was faking news or broadcasting threatening material. The media, and prosecutors as well now, have blurred the lines between the two issues. Yet this is an important distinction, as police and courts should only have jurisdiction over "intimidation" -- although an extremely vague and dubious charge in itself -- but not over journalistic ethics.
In their indictment, prosecutors acknowledged that Chang had indeed passed the video on to TVBS headquarters, which decided to broadcast the video. As the official charge against Shih and Chang was for being willing accomplices in Chou's "intimidation," but not for faking news, whether or not the higher ups at TVBS were aware that their reporters had been involved is irrelevant.
It should have been obvious that the content of the video was a thug threatening violence against a rival gang leader, and yet they decided that this was fit for broadcast. Therefore, claiming ignorance about the video's source may serve as a weak defense against charges that they deliberately fabricated news, but not against the official charge of intimidation.
Ultimately, it is the supervisors who determine what material is appropriate and what is not. As such, although Shih and Chang should certainly bear responsibility for their own ethical infractions, they should not be made scapegoats for the mistakes made by TVBS management.
But even prosecutors seemed confused about what they were supposed to be investigating. In indicting Shih, they cited him for "intervening in the news incident" by temporarily stopping filming to pause for Chou when he bungled parts of his speech. Therefore, they say he was not just a reporter, but an accomplice in making the video.
Such a claim is certainly venturing into an extremely blurry area. Journalists around the world interview terrorists and other criminals. As long as they don't actively influence what their interviewees say, or purposely fabricate the material, it makes little difference if the journalist filmed the video himself or if the tape was sent to the bureau in an unmarked package. The question is whether what is on the tape contributes constructively to public debate. In this case, the answer is a resounding no.
In the end, all the details about who said what, who filmed what, and who oversaw the editing of the video are all beside the point. The problem is a sensationalist news environment in which stations like TVBS think that violent threats from thugs constitute real news. The video must have passed through many hands and undergone several reviews before it was broadcast on national television. Apparently, there weren't any decision makers at TVBS who thought that airing the video, regardless of its connection to their reporters, was irresponsible and lacking in real news value.
One would hope the public would voice their displeasure by switching channels. But with Lee Tao's (
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs