A professor of labor law, commenting on the “one fixed day off and one rest day” policy on Tuesday, warned the public about “mediacracy,” or the media having control over how people perceive and appraise public policies.
While he was referring to the risk of allowing the media to set the policy agenda, Taiwan’s nonstop news has also awarded politicians room for ostentatious performances and remarks that are only corrected or evaluated — if at all — much later, when public attention has already faded.
The professor, who commented on poll results surveying perceptions of the new labor law, said that the government’s policy implementation is more like a “beauty contest”: The public tends to view it negatively when they see media coverage of a strong opposition.
The media has also been setting the tone of the policy, relating price hikes to changes to workers’ days off, he said.
Reporting, or reciting, employers’ complaints about cost increases has led the public to attribute price hikes to the policy, even though granting workers better working conditions — which requires employers’ effort — was the whole point of the amendments.
Social welfare organizations have reportedly been the hardest hit by the new law and they have complained to some business leaders, who in turn said the government was being “cruel.”
In one news report, a story by a third-grader who said the new law was going to make people “too poor to have anything to eat,” was cited.
Why is the media reporting on the possibility of the new policy leading to poor conditions for people in need if the question of why businesses are allowed to maintain their dogged practice and mentality of relying on “low personnel costs” remains unasked?
Constant updates motivated by the competition for viewers or readers has accustomed consumers to truncated and sensational or controversial news. Consumers’ habit of reading short pieces about “the latest of the latest” news has encouraged politicians to behave irresponsibly to gain media exposure, which is almost guaranteed with 24-hour media platforms needing to fill their time.
For example, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Chang Li-shan (張麗善) called a news conference to accuse the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) of arbitrarily changing a regulation in an attempt to release information on National Farmers’ Association members to candidates running for election.
Chang said the change posed the potential for personal information leaks and “blackmail and bribery,” but failed to mention that incumbent politicians already have access to such information.
It was only weeks later, when a DPP lawmaker requested that Chang recuse herself from reviewing a budget proposal, that it was revealed that Chang’s husband is the head of the association.
It is a long shot to claim that Chang’s accusation would not have been made if there was no need for constant news updates, but it would not be unreasonable to argue that her news conference to accuse the DPP of “tyranny of the majority” — a term the KMT like to throw about — might have been encouraged by the knowledge that just one short report on the event would get attention and the sympathy of her party’s supporters based on confirmation bias.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
RSS