Airport amenities
As a researcher who has investigated the role of self-selected leisure reading for the past three decades, I was, at first, very happy to see that there is a reading zone at the Taipei airport (at Gate C-5, Eva Airlines).
Our research has concluded that leisure reading has a powerful effect on both first and second-language development: Those who read a great deal on their own develop large vocabularies, good writing style, better grammar, and learn a lot about a wide variety of topics. The reading zone at C-5 seems to be a strong endorsement of pleasure reading.
My inspection of the area on two occasions, about 10 days apart, showed, however, that nobody sitting in the area was reading any of the books displayed.
I noticed that the waiting passengers were not sitting around bored. They had their own reading material, were talking, or were busy with their computers.
My concern is that the lack of interest in the reading zone (admittedly based on two brief observations) will be interpreted as a lack of interest in reading.
This is not the correct interpretation. There are good reasons why waiting passengers were not reading the material displayed.
About 99 percent of what was displayed were books, and most were novels. There were very few magazines. Reading zone users are not allowed to take books out of the reading zone area: They have to be returned. Travelers waiting for a flight are not going to start reading a novel that they certainly cannot finish during the typical waiting period.
Taipei airport should keep the reading zone, but include more “quick reads,” especially magazines. Passengers should be allowed to borrow books and return them at their destination.
Travelers about to get on long flights who forgot to pack a book will be grateful. And publishers might want to donate the opening chapter of some of their newest books, especially books available in airport bookstores at the passengers’ destination.
Stephen Krashen
Professor emeritus,
University of Southern California
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers