Immediately following the shooting of Sean Lien (連勝文) on the eve of Saturday’s special municipality elections, the focus of all the television news reports seemed to make all the election candidates disappear from TV screens. Some media outlets kept broadcasting comments like “we must not let Lien’s blood be spilled in vain,” “Lien was only shot because he had different political views,” “Use your vote to stop violence in elections” and “God save Taiwan,” while 3D animations showed eerie images of how the bullet pierced Lien’s face and skull.
Around midnight on the night of the shooting, guests on talk shows were sobbing and saying how much hardship lay ahead for Lien before they even knew the details of his injuries.
For voters, the shooting and these comments brought back memories of the shooting that happened just before the 2004 presidential election. While the two shootings were different in nature, they are similar in the way the media manipulated them.
Studies have been made on how media are used to awaken strong emotions within people. The research has been used to explain how media broadcasts can awaken irrational logic that is hidden within the minds of viewers or listeners. For example, many people in the US still associate the Japanese with Pearl Harbor and thus the phrase “Pearl Harbor” in the US has an almost mythical quality. If the image of Pearl Harbor is called up, an irrational “emotional twitch” or “spasm” will be aroused in which people remember how the Japanese once hurt the dignity of US citizens and took many lives.
It is now clear that after two pre-election shootings, many politicians are becoming more skilled at arousing this irrational logic among voters. When certain ideas or words that arouse certain feelings in voters are used and linked to a certain political party, the side using this as a form of manipulation stands to benefit greatly.
However, in the event of a pre-election shooting, shouldn’t the media have a higher sense of self-control so as to uphold the basic values of democratic elections? Are the media totally incapable of judging when a politician is acting in a manipulative manner and what their motives are for doing so? Do the media really have to contribute to making our whole society uneasy on the eve of a major election?
To protect against manipulation of information about elections by the media, the Civil Servants Election and Recall Act (公職人員選舉罷免法) bars the media from releasing information about, reporting on or offering critical opinions of the results of opinion polls 10 days before an election, as well as spreading rumors “for the purpose of making a candidate elected or not elected.” Now, shootings have been involved in two elections and this has left an indelible mark in the memories of voters, while destroying the trust that is a cornerstone of democratic societies. It is therefore time to regulate reports in the media and by politicians about shootings and elections.
It is crucial that media outlets establish criteria for self--regulation in relation to reporting about major disturbances of law and order before elections. It should be included in a mechanism for license renewal reviews. In addition, politicians or media who make speculative comments or remarks meant to provoke others and stir things up should also be treated as actions “for the purpose of making a candidate elected or not elected” as mentioned in the election and recall law. This would go a long way in regulating such issues.
After all, the majority of voters do not want to vote in an unsteady social atmosphere caused by guns and shootings.
Lillian Wang is an associate professor in the Graduate Institute of Journalism at National Taiwan University.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
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
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
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”
A high-school student surnamed Yang (楊) gained admissions to several prestigious medical schools recently. However, when Yang shared his “learning portfolio” on social media, he was caught exaggerating and even falsifying content, and his admissions were revoked. Now he has to take the “advanced subjects test” scheduled for next month. With his outstanding performance in the general scholastic ability test (GSAT), Yang successfully gained admissions to five prestigious medical schools. However, his university dreams have now been frustrated by the “flaws” in his learning portfolio. This is a wake-up call not only for students, but also teachers. Yang did make a big
RSS