Public broadcasting in the UK and Taiwan is moving in dramatically different directions. While the BBC's new charter and ample funding prepares one of the world's most distinguished public broadcasting organizations for the future, its Taiwanese counterpart, the newly-formed Taiwan Broadcasting System (TBS,
The BBC's new charter, which came into effect on Jan. 1, sets a number of goals over the next decade including developing the BBC's infrastructure; supporting the UK's TV and movie industries; internationalizing and providing innovative content and digital media so that all citizens have access to diverse, in-depth programming regardless of class, region, or ethnicity.
To achieve those goals, the BBC has been given an annual budget of ?3 billion (US$6 billion) over each of the next 10 years and, on Jan. 18th, the Labour and Conservative parties joined together to grant the BBC further annual increases. This strong legal and financial basis will help the flagship of the British broadcasting industry maintain its leadership position over the next decade.
In contrast, Taiwan's Government Information Office (GIO), which oversees the broadcasting industry, is neither pushing for passage of the draft public broadcasting act nor providing funding to TBS, which was created by combining the Chinese Television Service (CTS,
Why are the UK and Taiwan so different? British political parties try to win minds and votes with policies and achievements. Once in power, a party must honor its campaign promises and deliver policy achievements. Otherwise, it will quickly find itself out of power.
The Labour Party's media policy platform for the last election envisioned the BBC as laying the foundation for a nation of innovation in an era of cultural economy. Voters supported this policy and, since its latest victory, Labor has worked hard to make this vision a reality. Its ministers, furthermore, have stepped forward at key moments to defend the value of public broadcasting and build support for it.
Taiwan's media policy is less clear. When election time rolls around, the parties rely on the simplest possible strategy: polarizing the pan-blue and pan-green camps while mobilizing both pro-unification and pro-independence supporters. The public interest does not enter into their calculations, nor do they seek to win votes with their policies.
If a party wins, it immediately abandons any promises it has made and instead concentrates on raking in cash. Broadcast media policy moves forward only if you push it. If you stop, it stops. And when progress on media policy grinds to a halt, it means further delay to one of the nation's major development projects.
Civic groups need to understand that political parties will only keep their promises if they are pressured. This is the only way that Taiwan is going to get quality programming. The current administration promised to create a first-rate public broadcasting system. Meanwhile, other countries like the UK are sailing ahead into a new century. What is the GIO doing?
Lin Lih-yun is an associate professor in the Graduate Institute of Journalism at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Michael Fahey and Eddy Chang
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