Political commentators have made a fortune speaking on a series of topics on TV talk shows, from the trial of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) to President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), the Taiwan High Speed Rail scandal and the controversy over the screening of a documentary on World Uyghur Congress president Rebiya Kadeer during the Kaohsiung Film Festival.
Each TV station has its own political views. Those opposing Ma would never criticize Chen and vice versa. Neither Ma or Chen is God and they both have shortcomings and positive sides, but political talk shows are always one-sided.
While talk shows in most normal countries strive to maintain credibility, Taiwan’s seem to completely lack impartiality and yet enjoy relatively high ratings. Some of these local talk shows have a clearly stated political color from the very beginning. They do not have act so much like media outlets as propaganda devices for a political party. Their viewer base shares the same political affiliation. On the other hand, some TV programs did not have a fixed political stance when they started out, but unknowingly attracted an audience with a certain political affiliation, forcing them to take on the same stance.
It is bizarre to see a TV program radically change its political stance to follow its audience. Critics have described these hosts as similar to a person who “jumps” in the water to save a girl only to ask who pushed him in when he comes ashore. In other words, today, a TV show’s political ideology is established by its audience rather than the host.
TV programs with a certain political affiliation completely abandon impartiality and political commentators defend the parties they support. They survive thanks to an audience that shares their views and has no social impact because neutral viewers or those with opposing views never watch their shows.
Many political commentators have changed their political views — from pan-green to pan-blue or vice versa — mainly because of conflicts of political interest. However, some political commentators have switched political affiliation just to make more money, viewing themselves as actors that put up a show for any TV program that pays better. Whatever role they play, they are still actors.
There is yet another kind of political talk show in Taiwan. Although these shows lack a strong political affiliation, they have the hallmarks of a political quack. In the past, quacks often appeared in the countryside selling medicine by staging performances. Despite their lack of medical knowledge, they managed to deceive the public into thinking that they were medical experts and spend money to buy their concoctions.
Such political talk shows often mislead the public. One example is the appointment of former Department of Health minister Lin Fang-yue (林芳郁) as superintendent of Taipei Veterans General Hospital early this year. Although those in medical circles understood why he was chosen, some political talk shows criticized the appointment as an attempt by the government to ingratiate itself with the pan-green camp.
Political commentators have also said that medical graduates choose to work in major hospitals because they want to build up a clientele. What they don’t know is medical graduates who have passed national qualification examinations still cannot practice medicine on their own but must work for a period under the supervision of a senior physician at a major hospital.
These political quacks are only misleading the public and hurting the nation.
Chen Mao-hsiung is a professor of electrical engineering at National Sun Yat-sen University.
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
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.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath