On Nov. 22, the Public Television Service (PTS) Directors and Supervisors Review Committee -- elected by the legislature -- passed nominations for the PTS' fourth board of directors and supervisors.
On close examination of the procedure for selecting candidates for the PTS board, which is responsible for the development of the domestic film and television industries, it's clear the decision-making process is absurd.
After the list with director and supervisor nominees was published, some nominees said that they didn't even know they had been put on the list. The press release published by the Government Information Office (GIO) on Nov. 22 said that the GIO would first investigate whether the people nominated by the Review Committee were interested in the position before asking the Cabinet to officially appoint them. In other words, in drawing up the list, the GIO didn't even ask the nominees if they were interested.
This was a waste of time and shows disregard for the importance of the task and a profound lack of respect for the people involved. The list had to be double-checked because if any nominee does not want the job, the committee must come up with a replacement candidate.
In addition, the list of nominees included people who in the past publicly opposed the establishment of the Taiwan Broadcasting System (TBS). For these people to be nominated by the Cabinet for the board of directors and supervisors -- and for them to pass the review by the legislative committee -- sounds like a bad joke.
Why would the Cabinet even compile a list with TBS opponents? What are the legislature's review criteria and procedures? None of this is clear.
The Review Committee set up by the legislature is supposed to consist of impartial private individuals, yet includes two legislators. This greatly diminishes the impartiality of the review process. Even though these two legislators are highly regarded and would perhaps be able to exercise their duties impartially, it is unacceptable to nominate a sitting legislator as an impartial private individual.
In 2001, then New Party legislator Hsieh Chi-ta (
There have also been reports that some people skipped review meetings, while others left in protest of the fact that they were not given the list of nominees prior to the meeting, which would have allowed time for necessary preparations.
Finally, the background of some of the nominees has led to skepticism about the impartiality of the review process.
On the whole, as is stipulated in the Public Television Act (
But because of the grave problems with the review process, we cannot be sure that the new directors will identify with the idea of a public broadcasting system or that the director will have the determination to defend the value of public broadcasting.
The Cabinet and legislature must explain the details of the review process and explain the justification for seemingly inappropriate nominations.
The Cabinet and legislature also need to amend the Act and improve the board director nomination and review process, organizational responsibility and other issues.
Labor representatives should also be put on the board to protect labor rights and ensure the spirit of democracy in the workplace.
More transparency is a must for the upcoming chairman election and selection of the PTS president.
Anyone interested in the positions should be ready to explain publicly why they would be suited to the job and what goals they would work for.
A good candidate must be ready to push for amendments to the Public Television Law (公共電視法), integrate TBS, resist interference by outside forces, protect the values of public broadcasting and include more social forces in the planning and monitoring of the development of public broadcasting media. When looking for a president, the process should be public and transparent and the opinions of people working for TBS should be respected.
Kuan Chung-hsiang is president of Media Watch and assistant professor at the Department of Radio, Television and Film at Shih Hsin University. Lo Shih-hung is convener of the Campaign for Media Reform and associate professor in the Department of Communications at National Chung Cheng University.
Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers