The Want Want Group’s hostile response to a ruling by the National Communications Commission (NCC) earlier this month has begun to backfire. The controversy intensified to a degree that has hurt the group, and Want Want has only itself to blame.
Angered by conditions that the NCC imposed on proposed changes to management at China Television Co and CTiTV, the China Times Group — owned by Want Want — responded with newspaper ads personally targeting three members of the commission.
After these tactics prompted objections from media experts and many others, Want Want threatened its critics with legal action. Media Watch chairman Kuan Chung-hsiang (管中祥) and Association of Taiwan Journalists chairman Leon Chuang (莊豐嘉) were among those who received letters from the company demanding a public apology … or else.
In doing so, Want Want confirmed the concerns of skeptics that it was willing to resort to dirty tactics to suppress opinions that it finds unacceptable. The group’s newspaper attacks on NCC members sparked accusations that the company hoped to press the commission into retracting its provisions. When the NCC subsequently weakened the conditions, those concerns were magnified, if not vindicated.
Want Want’s behavior is disturbing for a company that, as a stakeholder in the media market, is in a position to protect — or curb — freedom of speech.
But Want Want may be regretting its strategy.
Last week, media scholars presented a protest letter — including the signatures of around 150 of their colleagues — that condemned Want Want over its threats. Now, more than 400 media workers and observers have called on the company to respect freedom of speech and ethics in journalism.
The backlash did not end there. Want Want’s actions drew sharp words from the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), which criticized the company’s “attempts to intimidate journalists, public commentators and NCC personnel” and questioned its “commitment to freedom of expression and the value of independent voices in Taiwan.”
The bad press may have reached its apex: Even before the federation’s statement on Monday, Want Want, looking rather foolish, if still thuggish, softened its tone when a top company official indicated in a meeting last week with two academics that the company might cease its attacks on critics.
But even if Want Want learns to respect its critics — or at least leave them alone — there is still cause for alarm over its role in the media. When a company that earns the vast majority of its revenue in China gains a stake in major Taiwanese news outlets, the potential for back-room influence on editorial freedom is immediate and profound.
Beijing has a track record of leaning on foreign firms — Yahoo’s betrayal of journalist Shi Tao (師濤) being just one consequence. Regardless of Want Want’s intentions, it is likely that Beijing will attempt to exploit the group’s dependence on the Chinese market to influence the content of its media outlets.
This week wasn’t the first time this year that the IFJ expressed concern about media developments in Taiwan, and events this year indicate that it might not be the last. The organization also expressed concern that the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is meddling in state-run media.
In the case of the Want Want Group, it is hoped that the outcry among media experts at home and abroad will be enough to make it think twice before bullying journalists and academics again. Either way, a grim precedent has been set: If you have enough money, clout and aggression, you can walk all over the NCC.
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Strategic thinker Carl von Clausewitz has said that “war is politics by other means,” while investment guru Warren Buffett has said that “tariffs are an act of war.” Both aphorisms apply to China, which has long been engaged in a multifront political, economic and informational war against the US and the rest of the West. Kinetically also, China has launched the early stages of actual global conflict with its threats and aggressive moves against Taiwan, the Philippines and Japan, and its support for North Korea’s reckless actions against South Korea that could reignite the Korean War. Former US presidents Barack Obama
The pan-blue camp in the era after the rule of the two Chiangs — former presidents Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) — can be roughly divided into two main factions: the “true blue,” who insist on opposing communism to protect the Republic of China (ROC), and the “red-blue,” who completely reject the current government and would rather collude with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to control Taiwan. The families of the former group suffered brutally under the hands of communist thugs in China. They know the CPP well and harbor a deep hatred for it — the two
RSS