“A lie can travel halfway round the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” And to make matters worse, their effect on the electorate when an election enters the home stretch can be enormous — providing the undecided a defense, in Taipei’s case, to fall back on for not voting for a certain candidate. Lies are “lies” only when they have been proven wrong; until then, they are called allegations, or simply “rumors.”
An interesting example can show how people are easily duped, maybe willingly, by rumors citing neutral data, but accompanied by political aspersions.
A message has recently been passed around via Line, a communication app widely used in the nation, with a link attached in which legislators’ votes on a proposal in November last year are recorded. The crux of the message is the introductory comment to the link, which explicitly says that the vote was on an amendment to the Act Governing Food Safety and Sanitation (食品安全衛生管理法) to raise the penalties for violations.
“You can see from this who is colluding with black-hearted manufacturers,” the message says.
The linked Web page showed that the opposition parties were “against” the proposal. The truth is, while the Web site provided neutral data on how the lawmakers had voted that day, it was not in fact a vote on the food safety law amendment, but on the legislative agenda proposed by the ruling party, which had placed the motion concerning food safety at the very end of the agenda (and blocked the amendments to the act proposed by the opposition parties).
Although the rumor was quickly exposed on the social network, it could easily sway those who are not in the social networks of people who cared enough to find out the facts.
There is no evidence that the rumor was spread by the ruling party or its affiliates, but there is no shortage of examples of similar tactics used on behalf of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) in the local election campaign. The MG149 account hubbub and allegations of tax evasion on earnings from speeches targeting independent Taipei mayoral candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) are aimed at spreading rumors rather than gaining a conviction.
The use of personal bank accounts for the management of the MG149 account is controversial indeed, despite all the justifications, as the team concerned is playing in a gray zone where clear established rules are wanting. However, to accuse Ko of corruption seems to be an overreach, especially when the money was not used to line his pocket.
The tax evasion allegation about Ko’s earnings from speeches was a greater travesty, which ended not only in people finding out Ko has been donating his speech earnings back to the groups that had invited him, but also in a revelation of the ruling party’s blatant abuse of state power.
It has been said that insofar as Taipei has a predominantly pan-blue constituency, the only thing the KMT needs to do is to cajole this majority of pan-blue voters, who have been unwilling to openly voice their support for KMT candidate Sean Lien (連勝文) or remain “undecided” over their dissatisfaction with Lien, into going to the polling stations on election day. What they need according to this vein of thought might simply be a push, or a reason to vote against Ko, who, without official party affiliation, could be their tentative pick.
Confirmation bias is a problem that bedevils everyone, but it could come in degrees. After all, it is not difficult to determine the degree of veracity between a former physician’s “corruption” and the sincerity of a candidate with second-generation wealth, who is from a billionaire family, with his father and grandfather having served as public officials, when he said that his still-prominent father once warned him that going into politics leads to either jail or starvation.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS