“Reading the water meter” (查水表, cha shuibiao) is an ordinary expression that in China has taken on the additional meaning of police officers getting people to open their doors by claiming that they are there to read the water meter, or some other excuse. It also includes situations where the police leave notices instructing people to attend interviews.
During the past couple of weeks, the expression has been heard all over the place in Taiwan, where the police are being accused of using such tactics.
Criminal Investigation Bureau Commissioner Huang Ming-chao (黃明昭) spoke to the media to refute these accusations, presenting statistics and insisting that the police only investigate unlawful activities and never “read the water meter.”
Nonetheless, some people with preconceived opinions have continued to make the accusations.
All this talk of “reading the water meter” might make sense in China, but Taiwanese police never “read the meter.” They do not need to, because they have good relations with the public and when they interview people, they get straight to the point, without beating about the bush.
Besides, water meters in Taiwan are usually located in the fire-break alleys between buildings, on the roof or in other common areas, so who would open their door to let someone in to read the water meter?
It would be fair to say that those who accuse Taiwanese police of “reading the water meter” are actually using disinformation to put the police in a difficult position.
In this post-truth era, democracies around the world are under siege by disinformation. Fake news fiercely attacks one of the key characteristics of democratic societies, namely that people have the right to doubt something and seek out the truth about it. In this way, fake news undermines the very core of democracy. Intellectuals, journalists and policymakers worldwide are examining this dystopian narrative.
The main narratives communicated in the post-truth era are influenced by independent social media, while public social media and the news industry are no longer in the mainstream. When anyone can publish something, some people with ulterior motives set out to intentionally mislead the public, which is pushing democracy into a state of emergency.
There is a need to uphold the right to seek the truth, which lies at the core of democracy, while also being able to censure fake news, which is harmful. This is clearly not a crisis that can be resolved either by extreme laissez-faire or by groundless accusations.
Political philosophers Johan Farkas and Jannick Schou critique existing solutions, saying that they neglect that democracy has never been about the search for truth alone: It is equally about the free speech and opinions of democratic people.
However, in the post-truth era, all democratic countries are suffering from how fake news uses freedom of speech to undermine democracy. A fair, forthright judicial system is crucial to truly safeguard democracy and soberly diagnose cases of fake news.
After investigating cases reported by victims, those cases can then be fairly transferred to judicial institutions for speedy review. Only by doing so can freedom of speech be safeguarded and those responsible for launching fake news attacks be uncovered.
Huang took it upon himself to explain how police departments investigate cases of fake news, saying that police always enforce the law on the basis of “reasonable grounds” and that these “reasonable grounds” apply within a fair and democratic system.
When someone comes forward to report a case, the police, having accepted the case as reported, launch an investigation to determine the truth. Having done so, they might transfer the case to judicial bodies, which proceed to review it.
Huang said that police never “shoot at random” or “read the water meter.”
This is precisely the kind of fair law enforcement that can safeguard a democratic society in the post-truth era from being maliciously attacked by disinformation, while at the same time protecting freedom of speech.
Samuel Lin is a police officer.
Translated by Julian Clegg
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
Taiwan is confronting escalating threats from its behemoth neighbor. Last month, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army conducted live-fire drills in the East China Sea, practicing blockades and precision strikes on simulated targets, while its escalating cyberattacks targeting government, financial and telecommunication systems threaten to disrupt Taiwan’s digital infrastructure. The mounting geopolitical pressure underscores Taiwan’s need to strengthen its defense capabilities to deter possible aggression and improve civilian preparedness. The consequences of inadequate preparation have been made all too clear by the tragic situation in Ukraine. Taiwan can build on its successful COVID-19 response, marked by effective planning and execution, to enhance
Since taking office, US President Donald Trump has upheld the core goals of “making America safer, stronger, and more prosperous,” fully implementing an “America first” policy. Countries have responded cautiously to the fresh style and rapid pace of the new Trump administration. The US has prioritized reindustrialization, building a stronger US role in the Indo-Pacific, and countering China’s malicious influence. This has created a high degree of alignment between the interests of Taiwan and the US in security, economics, technology and other spheres. Taiwan must properly understand the Trump administration’s intentions and coordinate, connect and correspond with US strategic goals.
RSS