After the investigation into the alleged misuse of the special "state affairs fund" comes to an end, the Taiwanese people should let the courts decide whether or not President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and his wife Wu Shu-jen (吳淑珍) are guilty as charged.
Everyone talks about the fundamental legal principle that an indictment does not imply guilt, but in Taiwan's highly politicized environment, Chen is facing calls to step down even before he has had a chance to defend himself in court.
Not only has a third recall motion against Chen been filed, the red-clad followers of former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chairman Shih Ming-teh (
The indictment against Chen's wife is not only a legal issue but also involves moral and political ones.
Regardless of one's point of view, however, each argument must be based on facts and hard evidence. Without them, all the talk, no matter how grand, is but a castle built on air.
Journalists capable of presenting well-balanced coverage of the issue therefore have a decisive role to play.
Media outlets reflecting public opinion and conveying facts to help the public get a clear picture of what is going on are indispensable for the public's ability to make a rational judgment about the political situation.
Unfortunately, Taiwan's media in general have been unable to abide by professional ethics and are -- with a few notable exceptions -- no longer capable of fulfilling the responsibilities of the fourth estate.
The survey conducted by the Edelman Asia-Pacific public affairs company three weeks ago showed that Taiwan's media credibility had plunged to a trust rating of just 1 percent.
Taiwan's media has become so unreliable that any hopes that it will fulfill its responsibilities are in vain.
Let us examine the media's performance by how it reflects public opinion.
After Chen's televised address, six major dailies immediately conducted their own public opinion polls. Results released by the United Daily News and the China Times indicated that only 13 percent of respondents believed what Chen had said.
However, not only was the design of these questionnaires problematic, but the sample size used -- from 700 to 900 -- was also inadequate.
This was insufficient to truthfully and effectively reflect general public opinion. What's more, the number of respondents who did not want to participate in the poll were either on the high side -- one third of those contacted by the United Daily refused to respond -- or simply not stated.
These media outlets are so biased that they are often rejected when seeking respondents. When opinion polls are conducted under these conditions, the results become bereft of value.
And yet the polls' results were used as a reflection of public opinion and were even put on front pages.
It is ridiculous to see how politicians and reporters pick whatever figures they need from these polls to show that public opinion supports this, that or the other thing.
In addition to their unreliable opinion polls, media outlets are also becoming increasingly incapable of reporting the truth, as seen during the recent political crisis.
Over the years, the Foundation for the Advancement of Media Excellence has reviewed how major newspapers handle their news reporting. We have found that with the intensifying political standoff over the past few months, the number of erroneous or false news reports has increased.
That politics has eroded journalistic professionalism in this way only underscores the conclusion reached by the Los Angeles Times after it observed Taiwan's media environment last year. "They can't handle the truth!" the Times said.
When handling news about political conflicts in particular, the editors-in-chief of some media outlets direct their reporters from the comfort of their air-conditioned offices in Taipei and news reporting becomes more like writing fiction with editors editing the story, making things up and adding to it.
In 2000, the manner in which journalists reported Vice President Annette Lu's (呂秀蓮) allegation that the president was involved in an extra-marital affair -- in other words, rumormongering -- has now become the standard for many media outlets.
What is worse is that errors committed in the past due to carelessness were corrected, whereas today false reports continue to proliferate -- even with denials by the officials concerned.
Objective reporting and representation of public opinion is poor, and critical thinking such as that found in editorials is not satisfactory.
Legally speaking, the indictments related to the president's special "state affairs fund" were simply the result of the investigation by the prosecutor acting as the state plaintiff.
Since the president had announced that he would respond to the indictments within two days, the media should of course have withheld their comments until after Chen had his press conference.
After all, listening to the opinions of both sides is a fundamental requirement for fair discourse.
However, as soon as the indictment was announced, one newspaper ran an editorial entitled "President Chen, you should resign immediately!"
It is evident that the newspaper in question had already reached its own conclusions.
Moreover, such an editorial can hardly reflect public opinion and instead showed the strong bias and prejudice of the newspaper and its management. The media's strong bias often causes it to take a selective look at news items.
Textbooks on news writing tell journalism students not to overuse adjectives. Still, in the recent political environment, some media have labeled the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) "reformist" or a "protector of the emperor," depending on their own stance.
Similarly, when discussing political integrity or transparency, some media outlets make a great effort to investigate the irregularities of the ruling party, but pay little attention to the much greater issue of the Chinese Nationalist Party's (KMT) inappropriately obtained party assets.
Thus, they can see the ruling camp's small problems but not the opposition's much more substantial problems. Such double standards are of course the result of their political ideology.
The public is not necessarily affected by biased reporting, but it surely damages media credibility. This is a clear case of self-destruction.
No wonder the credibility rating of Taiwan's media has fallen below 1 percent, which is even lower than that of online news sites or even blogs, Edelman's investigation shows.
Fortunately, the public has its own opinion of today's political and media standoff and they have expressed it through their selection of news media. As pertains to political TV talk shows, it is sad that Taiwan does not have an equivalent of ABC's Nightline, which provides in-depth analysis.
The only exception is the talk show hosted by Cheng Hung-yi (鄭弘儀) on SET TV which offers a somewhat more balanced, diverse and neutral coverage.
In recent months, Cheng's ratings have by far surpassed those of competing talk shows featuring famous talking heads who often uncover unsubstantiated scandals and talk nonsense.
As for newspapers, the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times' sister newspaper) and the Apple Daily (蘋果日報), which both contain less unsubstantiated news, have enjoyed the highest and second highest reading rates, showing that the popularity of newspapers is closely related to news quality.
Obviously, readers support newspapers that insist on quality and credibility in the current environment.
What is even more deserving of our attention is the strength displayed by grassroots readers and listeners in broadcast media. Take the anti-president campaign, for example. The reds could say whatever they wanted on Ketagalan Boulevard.
But once they had moved to areas outside Taipei, they were confronted by grassroots calls for stability in various call-in shows.
After Taipei Mayor Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) withdrew his support, the air quickly went out of the anti-Chen campaign, whose leaders had vowed never to retreat.
Grassroots voices have also served to support recent decisions by the DPP and the Taiwan Solidarity Union (TSU) in connection with the special "state affair fund."
These people, who constitute a solid foundation for Taiwanese society, base their opinions on facts and discuss issues based on common sense and reason.
They are less opportunistic than Taiwan's tricky politicians and less hypocritical than political commentators. They are straightforward and call things as they see them, while several editors view the world from Taipei, respecting no one but themselves and lacking even the sincerity and professionalism required by their jobs.
As a consequence, they fail to fulfill the media's responsibility to reflect public opinion, report facts and engender fair discourse. After years of reporting nonsensical stories, their character and style are far inferior to that of Taiwan's grassroots organizations.
Better news media are necessary for a better Taiwanese society.
Apart from the commercial news media mentioned above, the public could gain a good understanding of cirrent events in Taiwan by consulting the following news sources: the Central News Agency at www.cna.com.tw, which extremely seldom exaggerates news stories; South News at www.southnews.com.tw, with commentary from the perspective of Taiwanese awareness and Anti-Media at www.socialforce.org, which vows to correct media abuse.
Of course, media self discipline, adherence to professional ethics and a willingness to listen to readers and viewers are fundamental.
Neither politicians nor the media should ever forget that they need to hold the interests of the public above their own.
Lu Shih-hsiang is the chief executive officer of the Foundation for the Advancement of Media Excellence.
Translated by Daniel Cheng and 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