The Government Information Office's (GIO) attempt to reinstate order in the broadcasting industry and bring an end to the chaos is justice delayed. It has not, however, been welcomed by the public, and some have even raised criticism, saying that their interests are being violated.
UFO Radio chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (
First of all, it will not be the current GIO director who sullies the agency's name for posterity, but rather all the GIO directors who served during Jaw's time as a loyal Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) member, among them People First Party Chairman James Soong (
Jaw was a member of the martial law system, and has never been a victim of media suppression. On the contrary, he used the KMT's media suppression methods to make himself the media's golden boy and accrue power. Now that the GIO wants to reform, and Jaw's private interests are seen as failing to hold up to public scrutiny, he immediately launches a counterattack using his old political methods. It is repulsive.
Second, support is coming from other corners. Kuan Chung-hsiang (管中祥), convener of the Campaign for Media Reform (媒體改造學社), has affirmed the GIO's current review of the operations of medium range broadcasters to see if they comply with their originally stated purpose.
"It is simply a matter of legal administration, making up for past laziness in execution," Kuan said.
It shows that Lin Chia-lung is conscientious in carrying out his duties, and that he is taking action, which is praiseworthy.
Kuan's statement, which came out after Jaw publicly criticized the review, saying that, "If we are violating the law, I guess it means all previous GIO directors were incompetent, and that, you, Lin Chia-lung, are one clever guy," effectively replied on Lin's behalf, implying it was Jaw, and not Lin who was "trying to frame someone."
Third, it is a fact that UFO Radio broadcasts are jointly broadcast by other stations. The Broadcasting and Television Law (廣電法) was revised to eliminate the clause allowing radio stations to carry out joint broadcasts. This was an attempt to follow the original spirit of the law, which doesn't allow for this, although it fails to say so explicitly. Lin asked whether it really was necessary to maintain administrative orders passed on from previous directors. This is something that should be reviewed.
Fourth, Jaw claimed that jointly broadcast programs account for less than 70 percent of what is allowed under government regulations, but he brought forward no evidence to back this up. This claim has to be checked against the facts, and does not become true just because Jaw says it is.
Fifth, and most importantly, are the eight radio stations engaging in joint broadcasts with UFO Radio violating their found-ing guidelines? It is the job of the regulating authority, the GIO, to check this. Whether or not the station agrees, the GIO can investigate. By asking "why should they be so involved?" Jaw revealed his disregard for the law. In other words, when the law interferes with his unreasonable behavior, he objects to the authorities fulfilling their legal responsibilities. That is preposterous.
Jaw's desperation is proof that the reforms are reasonable.
Chin Heng-wei is editor in chief of Contemporary Monthly.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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