In a nation where all public sectors have been thoroughly politicized, citizens always tend to see so-called "independent" commissions as cure-alls. The same is true when it comes to the media reform issue, which the government and opposition have been arguing over bitterly.
Ever since the National Communications Commission (NCC) was given its name, there have been those who have been dissatisfied with the performance of the institutions currently in charge of broadcasting and telecommunications. In the commission, they have found an outlet for their unrealistic imaginations. They include people with ulterior motives, who deliberately use the NCC as an excuse to oppose reform.
It seems that substantive reform is unnecessary, so long as we emulate the US and come up with a Taiwanese version of the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Then, the thinking goes, all the evils absent in the US but so apparent here -- such as party-government-army unity and monopoly, will instantly disappear from Taiwan. At the very least, this will change the direction of public opinion, and move political parties' focus away from essential reform, leaving us to scrape along and postpone the changes we are waiting for.
I deeply believe that the majority of Taiwanese have been eagerly looking forward to the establishment of the NCC. Although the belief that a political miracle will happen all by itself is a bit naive, it is helpful for changing the status quo. However, the actions of a minority of irresponsible media and politicians with ulterior motives bring unrealistic and empty hopes. That in turn leads to a wait-and-see attitude, which restricts the current reform consensus that has been so hard to achieve.
In fact, if closely scrutinized, the high hopes for the future operations of the NCC are nothing but a mirage -- and the resulting disappointment and complaints will deepen the public's apathy towards politics. We must clearly recognize the feasibility and limitations of the various proposals in order to be able to avoid booty-sharing between political parties and other unreasonable demands that would destroy the functions that the NCC should possess.
First of all, the NCC will be responsible for the telecommunications, broadcasting and information sectors, and its status will be that of a second-level ministerial commission. Organizationally, however, it will not fall under the jurisdiction of the Executive Yuan, which makes it unique. Apart from legally stipulated supervisory and control powers, the NCC will therefore lack both the convenient mutual assistance that comes from the administrative unity of ministries and commissions, and the mutual support and assistance between members of the Cabinet team.
Second, the NCC's "independent" status will not be maintained through a balance between different political parties. Rather, the commission -- which will be made up of experts -- will transcend party politics through depoliticized organizational design and thorough controls and principles separating management from operations. It will thereby escape the influence of the success or failure of individual operators, and focus on technology, market and efficiency policies. Excessive political expectations and too many political missions will only cause the NCC to become engulfed in party struggles which will consume the commission's credibility.
Third, NCC members will come from relevant specialized fields, with technical members mainly coming from the Directorate General of Communications (
Finally, and most importantly, the the social and economic conditions and political motivation to initiate media reform will dissipate if we relax. The FCC is basically the protector of the game rules for a "normal" market in a "normal" country. By comparison, the country's broadcasting sector has lived through a decades-long abnormal situation where it has been monopolized by party and state, and where the state apparatus has been treated as private property.
After the transition of power four years ago, the broadcasting industry was for the first time subjected to a comprehensive inspection. Today, we have reached the moment when President Chen Shui-bian (
Howard Shyr is an executive member of the Campaign for Media Reform.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Denmark has consistently defended Greenland in light of US President Donald Trump’s interests and has provided unwavering support to Ukraine during its war with Russia. Denmark can be proud of its clear support for peoples’ democratic right to determine their own future. However, this democratic ideal completely falls apart when it comes to Taiwan — and it raises important questions about Denmark’s commitment to supporting democracies. Taiwan lives under daily military threats from China, which seeks to take over Taiwan, by force if necessary — an annexation that only a very small minority in Taiwan supports. Denmark has given China a
Speaking at the Copenhagen Democracy Summit on May 13, former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said that democracies must remain united and that “Taiwan’s security is essential to regional stability and to defending democratic values amid mounting authoritarianism.” Earlier that day, Tsai had met with a group of Danish parliamentarians led by Danish Parliament Speaker Pia Kjaersgaard, who has visited Taiwan many times, most recently in November last year, when she met with President William Lai (賴清德) at the Presidential Office. Kjaersgaard had told Lai: “I can assure you that ... you can count on us. You can count on our support
Many local news media over the past week have reported on Internet personality Holger Chen’s (陳之漢) first visit to China between Tuesday last week and yesterday, as remarks he made during a live stream have sparked wide discussions and strong criticism across the Taiwan Strait. Chen, better known as Kuan Chang (館長), is a former gang member turned fitness celebrity and businessman. He is known for his live streams, which are full of foul-mouthed and hypermasculine commentary. He had previously spoken out against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and criticized Taiwanese who “enjoy the freedom in Taiwan, but want China’s money”
Last month, two major diplomatic events unfolded in Southeast Asia that suggested subtle shifts in the region’s strategic landscape. The 46th ASEAN Summit and the inaugural ASEAN-Gulf-Cooperation Council (GCC)-China Trilateral Summit in Kuala Lumpur coincided with French President Emmanuel Macron’s high-profile visits to Vietnam, Indonesia and Singapore. Together, they highlighted ASEAN’s maturing global posture, deepening regional integration and China’s intensifying efforts to recalibrate its economic diplomacy amid uncertainties posed by the US. The ASEAN summit took place amid rising protectionist policies from the US, notably sweeping tariffs on goods from Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam, with duties as high as 49 percent.