Before approving Want Want Group’s (旺旺集團) managerial takeover of China Television Co (CTV, 中視) and CTiTV(中天電視), the National Communications Commission (NCC) held hearings amid great fanfare, during which experts and academics almost unanimously opposed Want Want’s plans. Their concerns focused on the risk that the group could monopolize domestic media. Yet the NCC approved the proposal, disregarding the potential ramifications of a monopoly spanning newspapers, cable and terrestrial TV.
The NCC’s move threatens to put media under the control of politicians, special interest groups and corporations and undermine its supervisory role of the fourth estate.
The NCC should not have approved this deal spanning different media.
Although provisions were imposed on the takeover ostensibly to prevent a media monopoly from forming, upon closer examination, these conditions place no legal constraints on CTV and CTiTV. In fact, they could already have been met and the NCC would not know because it does not have the power to investigate whether this is the case.
At the same time, there are numerous ways to get around the rules, so there is no way that the NCC could stop a media monopoly.
A proposal that should never have been allowed has been approved by the NCC in a roundabout way.
Furthermore, the Want Want Group made wide use of its print media outlets to accuse the NCC of abusing its authority for tacking conditions onto the approval and then used its cable and terrestrial TV stations to broadcast reports that gave the impression that the NCC had dealt with CTV and CTiTV unfairly.
The NCC ended up making concessions by changing some of the conditions it set for CTV and CTiTV to suggestions rather than criteria.
Media outlets can run editorials and print news reports and ads to defend themselves when their own interests are at stake, but when media outlets become a tool for huge corporations trying to protect their interests the result is nothing short of scandalous.
From now on, we will find that CTiTV, CTV and the China Times will join forces in lashing out at anything that runs counter to the interests of the Want Want Group. This article may soon elicit criticism from these media outlets as well.
Since Taiwan is a diverse democracy, a media monopoly runs counter to public interests. The NCC should not have compromised on its conditions.
Yeh Yi-jin is a Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
TRANSLATED BY TED YANG
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with