With the presidential election behind us, nearly half the population of Taiwan will be unhappy with the outcome. Many factors surely affected the outcome, but political advertising was definitely one of the most important.
There was a lot of advertising by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), and it was very varied. According to figures on the parties’ Web sites, the DPP produced 24 video and print ads — including TV spots and online posts — and the KMT 60, beating the record of 44 set during then-KMT chairman Lien Chan’s (連戰) 2000 campaign.
Many of these ads lacked focus, with a majority attempting to simultaneously set out policies, formulate an image, attack opponents and criticize their policies. It was initially difficult to discern any particular central theme in the DPP’s ads, while the KMT’s seemed to lose focus in the later stages of the campaign when it become evident the DPP was gaining ground. In this election we saw little of the overriding themes of former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) 2000 campaign or President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) campaign in 2008.
One of the problems with the KMT’s ads was the lack of new information. Ma’s advertising failed to tell the electorate anything about his vision for the nation, it merely told them what they already knew. Too many of the ads concentrated on corruption within the DPP, returning to a theme the KMT had been talking about for the past four years.
In addition, the KMT seemed to suffer from having too much cash, with four ads starring celebrities endorsing Ma. It was unclear who exactly these ads were supposed appeal to or what they were trying to say. Are young voters really going to vote for a candidate because of a celebrity endorsement?
Neither were the DPP’s ads perfect. First, the ads failed to attack the so-called “1992 consensus,” which is the DPP’s Achilles’ heel. Merely saying the “1992 consensus” does not exist or that a victory by its presidential candidate, Tsai Ying-wen (蔡英文), would not lead to a deterioration of cross-strait relations, fails to persuade most voters.
What the DPP should have done, in language ordinary people could understand, was to appeal to voters’ memories. For example, it could have asked “if there is ‘one China, with each side having its own interpretation,’ why did the police target people waving the Republic of China flag during the visit of Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait Chairman Chen Yunlin (陳雲林)?” Or “why was it necessary to use the title ‘Mr’ for Ma rather than ‘president’ during Chen’s visit?”
The party’s second failing was not having the courage to broach the issue of class struggle. The burgeoning income gap, the poor getting poorer and the lack of opportunities for young people are area of vulnerability for the KMT. Yet the DPP held back. Its two ads on unemployment benefit and social housing trod very carefully around the issues.
If you enter a fight you have to be willing to land a decisive blow, otherwise how can you expect to win? The KMT was not shy in its attacks over the persimmon row, drawing blood with every cut. The “99 percent” struggle is natural territory for the DPP, but its hands were tied in this election because of the atypical approach it decided to take.
Many factors influenced the outcome of the election. For the wealthy and well-connected, vested interests were an important consideration, while for poor and disadvantaged, more immediate interests made them vulnerable to vote buying.
Tried and tested approaches are necessary to win elections. Taking a soft approach in election advertising does little more than make one feel good about oneself.
Cheng Tzu-leong is a professor at National Chengchi University’s College of Communication.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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.