There is one month to go to the presidential election. Despite the calls for a debate between the presidential candidates, something that is regarded as important to the democratic process, none has been forthcoming.
This is unfortunate for a society such as Taiwan’s, in which democracy is still continuing to develop.
It is small wonder that a number of civic groups, frustrated at what is — or what is not — happening, called on the candidates to arrange a presidential debate as a matter of urgency.
From a democratic and broadcasting perspective, one of the most fundamental principles of democracy is that the electorate is given access to the clearest and most accurate information regarding a candidate’s election campaign and their policies, so that people can make informed decisions about whom to vote for, providing the best chance of getting the right person for the job.
Televised political debates are a major part of this process. Without them, how is the democratic process supposed to operate?
The question is, should it be up to public broadcasters to arrange these debates? It is a question that has got many broadcast media academics, and in particular those among them who are long-term advocates of public broadcasting, banging their heads against a wall.
As an academic specializing in broadcast media and a member of a group promoting media reform in this nation, there are a number of important points to share:
First, Taiwan needs a presidential debate, and it needs to happen as soon as possible.
All presidential candidates are duty-bound to provide the electorate with information with which they can make the right decision. The respective candidates should put aside their differences, establish some form of consensus and hastily organize a presidential debate, so each side can clearly and concisely lay out its policy direction and stance on the major issues in the hope of winning support.
Second, priority should be given to public broadcasters when it comes to televising the debate.
Public TV stations, with their emphasis on accessibility and public spirit, are the fairest, most autonomous means for the transmission of public information that the nation has at this time.
The best policy would be to give public broadcasters priority for organizing the debates, while commercial broadcasters can get involved after cooperating with the state-run institutions.
Third, this issue demonstrates the requirement in a civil society for a fair, autonomous broadcasting platform that public infrastructure provides.
Unfortunately, the limited financial resources they are given, and the conditions they are expected to meet, do conspire to prevent public broadcasters from being able to provide the widest, most efficient coverage at the present time.
This is a regrettable situation.
It is for this reason that the nation should pass, as soon as possible, a Public Television Act (公共電視法) that actually meets the public’s expectations and provides public broadcasters with the resources and operating funds that they need and deserve, so that the public’s access to broadcasting rights can be assured.
Chang Chun-yen is secretary-general of the Campaign for Media Reform and an adjunct media professor at the Department of Public Relations and Advertizing at Shih Hsin University.
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.