The recent incident involving Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Vice Chairman Zhang Mingqing (張銘清) being mobbed in Tainan allowed many people in Taiwan to gain an understanding of just what exactly is meant by “journalism based on the one country, two systems model.”
Zhang studied journalism and worked as a journalist for more than a decade before taking up a post in the Taiwan Affairs Office (TAO) of China’s State Council, where he also served for more than a decade. When he was appointed dean of the new School of Journalism and Communication at Xiamen University in June last year, he proposed his theory of “journalism based on the one country, two systems model,” which he had conceived more than a decade earlier. “Journalism based on the one country, two systems model” should be classified as part of the overall “one country, two systems” formula.
However, the Chinese and the Taiwanese have different ideas about the media and it is therefore very difficult to have an environment beneficial to the implementation of the “one country, two systems” formula.”
The incident in Tainan has provided the people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait with a perfect opportunity to examine the issue of “journalism based on the one country, two systems model” in more depth. It is quite easy to see how Zhang applied this theory during his visit.
First, let us look at Zhang, for his words and actions are a perfect example of the workings of his theory. During his time as TAO spokesman, Zhang made comments that could almost be considered threats against Taiwan. However, after he arrived in Taiwan, and especially after the Tainan incident, Zhang had to be “different” and had to try to gain the recognition and acceptance of the Taiwanese. This worked, for the teary speech Zhang gave at the airport as he was leaving did manage to win some warmth and understanding from Taiwanese.
Second, we should consider whether this incident was an overflow of emotion on behalf of those worried about Taiwan’s sovereignty being sacrificed or whether it was a straight out act of violence that brought shame upon Taiwan and its democracy. Taiwanese media have shown no change, with different news channels giving totally different explanations of the same footage, with some TV stations focusing on what they view as “violent” acts of those with different political opinions.
However, Zhang made his thoughts clear when he said: “I believe those who behaved violently do not represent Tainan residents or the 23 million people of Taiwan.”
The Chinese media said last Wednesday that “such incidents should be regarded as normal in a diverse society,” a marked change in values compared with the China of the past.
Earlier this year, a book on the media in post-1997 Hong Kong under the “one country, two systems” model, titled Xianggang zai yiguoliangzhi xia de xinwen shengtai (香港在一國兩制下的新聞生態) was published. The book showed the media in Hong Kong is now facing unprecedented challenges in terms of freedom of the press and the government’s control and use of the media.
Legislative Council member Leung Kwok-hung (梁國雄) once said that he was most worried about the people of Hong Kong having to be happy “slaves” that had to forget their most basic dignities and values.
I believe that Taiwanese and everyone involved in the media here believe in freedom of the press. I also believe that we will never be able to stand for a “one country, two systems” basis for the media, which would harm our most basic dignities and values.
Lillian Wang is an associate professor in the Graduate Institute of Journalism at National Taiwan University.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
China has not been a top-tier issue for much of the second Trump administration. Instead, Trump has focused considerable energy on Ukraine, Israel, Iran, and defending America’s borders. At home, Trump has been busy passing an overhaul to America’s tax system, deporting unlawful immigrants, and targeting his political enemies. More recently, he has been consumed by the fallout of a political scandal involving his past relationship with a disgraced sex offender. When the administration has focused on China, there has not been a consistent throughline in its approach or its public statements. This lack of overarching narrative likely reflects a combination
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
It is difficult to think of an issue that has monopolized political commentary as intensely as the recall movement and the autopsy of the July 26 failures. These commentaries have come from diverse sources within Taiwan and abroad, from local Taiwanese members of the public and academics, foreign academics resident in Taiwan, and overseas Taiwanese working in US universities. There is a lack of consensus that Taiwan’s democracy is either dying in ashes or has become a phoenix rising from the ashes, nurtured into existence by civic groups and rational voters. There are narratives of extreme polarization and an alarming
RSS