Media outlets covered President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) recent Central American trip very differently. Some offered excessive praise, while others offered only criticism. This is nothing new.
Before the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lost office in 2000, media outlets would choose sides, but their agendas were not so obvious. After the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) gained power, opposing opinions became increasingly evident. Some media described the government as always being right and the opposition as trying to put a curse on Taiwan, while others said the exact opposite.
After the KMT regained power, the media continued to behave in the same way, though now most of the media say the KMT is always right and the DPP is always wrong. Only a few outlets avoid the two extremes.
Most media outlets depict political parties as either perfect or evil beyond redemption. From a business standpoint, these outlets can attract readers or viewers who are either purely “blue” or purely “green,” allowing them to make a profit. From a professional perspective, however, they wield no influence.
While media outlets may hold political stances, they should strive to be impartial by balancing criticism and praise of the parties they support or oppose.
The presumption of innocence means no one can be convicted without proof. There may be cases where no law has been broken but unreasonable actions have been taken, such as when a citizen feels wronged by a civil servant but has no recourse to legal action. Luckily, the supervisory powers of the Control Yuan make up for the inadequacies of the judiciary.
The use of the Control Yuan’s power does not require adequate evidence of a crime, but relies on voting to pass impeachments and rectifications. Even if civil servants do not break the law, they could commit errors and can be brought before the Control Yuan.
However, the Control Yuan’s powers extend only to civil servants and elected administrative leaders, not legislators or county and city councilors. This means elected officials can do all sorts of ludicrous things as long as they do not break the law or there is no evidence they have broken the law. This has created many gray areas in society.
In most democracies, the media can shed light on such gray areas. The media are called the Fourth Estate because they make up for government inadequacies. The Fourth Estate puts pressure on elected officials who must amend their actions as a result. Unfortunately, Taiwan’s media have lost this function.
The public has no confidence in media objectivity. Because the majority of Taiwan’s media outlets have a specific political agenda and help certain politicians by attacking their opponents, they have lost their credibility. The media can no longer put pressure on elected officials who act inappropriately.
The media are also disseminators of knowledge, but once again, Taiwan’s media have failed to perform this role well. Some talk show commentators are known for playing fast and loose with the facts.
Most media outlets have failed in their role as a Fourth Estate watchdog. Their reporting is full of errors and often politically biased. Taiwan’s media still have a long way to go.
Chen Mao-hsiung is a professor of electrical engineering at National Sun Yat-sen University.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations