Once again a press freedom incident with great social impact has erupted.
Media reports that highlight social reality often decide the values of society. Let's consider for a moment the impact that last year's Chu Mei-feng (
Regardless of the contents of the VCD in the Chu Mei-feng scandal, the incident involved an invasion of privacy, which should be off-limits to the media. The media, however, still hides behind press freedom when distributing pornographic VCD's and corrupting the moral values of Taiwanese society.
In the latest row over state secrets, the media still think freedom of the press means total freedom from restriction, even believing that they are right to report issues that threaten the existence of Taiwan in the international arena. In fact, both incidents involve infringements of privacy: one is an invasion of personal privacy, the other of "national privacy."
It also involves the relationship between individuals and the state. Without the individual, how can there be a state? Without the protection of national laws, however, great harm would be done to the interests of the individual. The two therefore exist in symbiosis and they can only prosper and develop on a basis of mutual respect.
The importance of the media lies in the supervision and protection of this symbiosis, creating a space for balanced debate. To a certain degree, the media represent the common conscience of the individual and the state, since the media provides even wider space for consideration and reflection.
When, however, press freedom becomes an unrestrained ideology of its own and begins to invade individual privacy -- judging people and destroying the living space of the state -- which is also duty-bound to protect the media's freedom of expression, shouldn't we then stop to consider whether this kind of press freedom is an abuse of press freedom?
The victim in the sex-VCD scandal was betrayed by her best friend while Taiwan has been sold out by the very intelligence personnel that should protect her safety.
Freedom of the press is supposed to eliminate conflict and increase trust, but certain media outlets have instead become the foremost disseminators of negative material, creating an unprecedented crisis of trust in Taiwanese society.
In a short ten years or so, Taiwan has been transformed from an authoritarian regime into a democratic society. The peaceful transfer of power following the presidential election in March 2000 received tremendous global attention. In our moment of pride over Taiwan's democratization, we also have to understand that the road toward democracy and the rule of law is not an easy one. Taiwanese society is still adapting to the change.
Regardless of whether the leaking of state secrets is part of infighting among intelligence agencies, or if it is opposition parties striking back at the government, this is a transitional period for Taiwanese society. Maybe such tests will bring home important lessons to Taiwanese society, leading to a reconsideration of the responsibility of the media and the position of press freedom.
Wu Chih-chung is assistant professor at the Department of Political Science, National Chengchi 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