According to news reports, while inspecting the General Information Office (GIO) some time ago, Louis Chao (
In theory, there are three forces regulating the media.
The first is "self-discipline," which is the hope that all media will understand their special role and develop the capacity to critique government policymaking, monitor the social climate and promote the development of democracy -- all without fear or favor. This is the most essential media-regulating force.
The second force is "the discipline of others," which means the monitoring of media performance by non-governmental organizations who can hold the media to the principles of journalistic ethics characterized in the last paragraph. This is something certainly worth pursuing, but is far from a reality at present.
The third force is "legal discipline," which refers to the regulation of media behavior through legislation. This is the bluntest of all regulating forces and unless it is absolutely unavoidable, efforts should be made not to use it, as this force can and often is used to threaten press freedom.
If we consider the request by the gentlemen from the Control Yuan that the GIO keep an eye on the media, we'll find hidden issues concerning the role and performance of the media that are well worth our deep consideration.
First of all, if even members of the Control Yuan, representing the judicial branch, do not accept media behavior and believe that a stern eye should be kept on media outlets, there are two issues worth consideration.
One, if the people of Taiwan believe that an eye should be kept on the media, then the media should engage in earnest self-examination over whether its performance has deviated from professionalism and the expectations of the people. Honestly speaking, though, looking at the present performance of the Taiwanese media, it seems that they have neither the ability nor the will to engage in self-reflection, and so the request for media self-discipline appears impossible.
But the question arises, who should control the media if they are incapable of self-reflection? If it is true as GIO Director-General Su Tzen-ping (
This is a taboo that no GIO director-general would dare break.
Under these conditions, legal discipline is both impermissible and impractical.
Finally, there is the "discipline of others." On the surface, it seems as if the "discipline of others" is the most accessible method for regulating the performance of the media. The problem is, however, who are these "others?"
These "others" are social and academic groups that Su said should be encouraged to exert the monitoring force.
More concretely, these "others" are you, I and all reading and listening people. The problem is that even though social and academic groups are willing to come out and monitor the media, they find it very difficult to obtain widespread popular attention and support. This is because the public doesn't know or believe that it can exert this kind of influence. The social groups that today have the intent of establishing a mechanism for the "discipline of others" therefore still stand alone, making "the discipline of others" a utopian force for regulating the media.
As there appears little hope for media self-discipline, or legal controls, we must place our hopes in the GIO to work for the wider public interest to come up with ways of encouraging or social and academic groups to initiate media regulation by "the discipline of others."
Chen Ping-hung is an associate professor in the Graduate Institute of Mass Communication at National Taiwan Normal University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS