On Dec. 4, the China Times ran a front-page story that President Chen Shui-bian (
First, was the story subjected to the established reporting procedures of truly professional journalists before publication? According to the editorial desk's explanation the next day, "the newspaper cross-checked the story with various sources. But the confirmation was incomplete, because the paper failed to verify the allegation with Chen or appropriate presidential staff in a timely manner."
The media can be more confident about the accuracy of information when it is confirmed by at least two sources. However, reporters are not always able to complete laborious confirmation work before deadlines. As a result, they have to depend on the reliability of their sources, as well as their own understanding of the story. Mistakes are inevitable under such circumstances. In this case, the paper verified the story with various sources. But it did not obtain a comment from Chen and without it the report was not balanced.
The report referred only to reliable sources and insiders. Is it appropriate not to name sources? Reporters should name sources in the interests of their own cred-ibility as well as their accountability. Still, when a story is sensitive, it's perfectly normal for reporters to protect their sources. Undoubtedly, some reporters may use the protection of sources as a pretext to hide their laziness and irresponsibility, but the occasional genuine need to protect sources cannot be ignored. Nor can it be presumed that a report in which a source is not identified is necessarily incorrect.
Did the newspaper itself play the role of gatekeeper? This role is crucial to the way in which a story is presented. The process can also reduce mistakes, although it's difficult to avoid personal biases and structural distortion. More importantly, through repeated checks and discussions, journalists can reduce the possible political, economic, social or legal impact of a report.
Third is the media's own news judgment, which determines the value that the public places in a report. The more valuable a news piece is, the more noticeable a position it occupies. Editorial desks should stick to their guns once they have decided to run as front-page leads -- after thorough confirmation and evaluation -- reports making grave charges.
In the name of truth and the media's duty to monitor the government, journalists must strive to get to the bottom of this story.
Ku Lin-lin is an associate professor of journalism at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS