A media orgy of speculation and rumors has made headlines on a daily basis since it was announced on May 23 that the chemical di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, or DEHP, had been found in food additives. The list of beverages, food and other products impacted by the scare continues to expand.
To address the problem, the Department of Health (DOH) announced that last Tuesday would be a “D-Day” to end the practice of adding any of six specified industrial-use chemicals to clouding agents, an emulsifier used in beverages and foods. The following day the department launched a nationwide investigation, requiring companies and food stalls to present certification that their products were free of the six banned chemicals.
At the heart of the scare are the companies that produced the chemicals and supplied them to countless other manufacturers. However, amid the nationwide crackdown on tainted products that originated from two suppliers of clouding agents — Yu Shen Chemical Co and Pin Han Perfumery Co — some in the media have had their attention diverted from the actual problem of tainted products to focusing on the owner of Yu Shen Chemical Co, Lai Chun-chieh (賴俊傑), and his son, a Taipei Times reporter.
For example, unsubstantiated allegations were made by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Chiu Yi (邱毅) that Lai had donated heavily to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and that Lai’s son was being groomed to run as a DPP lawmaker in New Taipei City. The DPP held a press conference to dismiss Chiu’s remarks as “groundless lies.”
One again, personalities and politics have intervened to draw the focus away from the real issues: the extent of the contamination, the failure of the government’s health and safety standards system to detect the problem earlier and efforts to ensure there will not be a repeat of the problem.
The food scare crosses all political boundaries, just as it crosses ethnic and social lines. It also crosses administrative and government agency’s areas of responsibilities. Playing the blame game and scapegoating just to score a few political points or gain a few ratings points will not help resolve the problem or find a way to rectify the system.
Unfortunately, ignoring the real issue to focus on scandals and groundless speculation has become a common phenomenon among media outlets and political talk shows — all done while claiming to be defending free speech and the public’s right to know. Not only does this prevent the public from knowing anything, least of all gaining a better understanding of the truth behind the scare, it harms media credibility.
During the trial of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and his wife Wu Shu-jen (吳淑珍) over bribery and corruption charges, all sorts of rumors were “reported” on political talk shows. Many commentators said they acquired the information from “credible sources,” including prosecutors, but a lot of the allegations were proven to be bogus. For example, Chang Yu-hua (張友驊) was sentenced to 35 days in jail by the Taipei District Court in 2007 for falsely accusing Chen of meeting former Presidential Office deputy secretary-general Chen Che-nan (陳哲男), who was involved in the Kaohsiung Rapid Transit Corp scandal.
Since the lifting of martial law, Taiwanese have enjoyed freedom of speech. Media outlets and commentators should exercise this freedom with caution, remembering that with this privilege and right comes responsibilities. They should provide the public with hard facts and insights through discussion and debate rather than report rumors and politicize stories.
In the case of the food scare, the public would like to see more about how the government is handling the incident, ongoing investigations into the tainted products and which companies are responsible. Groundless speculation and false accusations are the last thing the public wants to hear.
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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.