Many eateries, cafeterias and restaurants lock their televisions on specific channels, local media reports said, adding that they are paid NT$500 per month to do so and are told not to switch channels.
This revelation has prompted a flurry of activities on Facebook, including a public survey on TV channel switching and a call to boycott these stations — colloquially known as “personally cult stations” (造神台) — to create a clean news environment in Taiwan.
A well-known Tainan musician also conducted a survey on TV channel settings at restaurants in the city’s Anping District (安平) and found in just a few days that dozens of restaurants in the area are cooperating with certain news channels.
The question is: Who is paying them NT$500 per month to lock their televisions on specific news channels in an attempt to promote their campaign to build a personality cult or promote a specific political ideology?
Apart from using money to interfere with the news environment and placing national security at risk, they might also have contravened the Fair Trade Act (公平交易法).
Regardless of the political motives behind a decision to pay restaurant owners to set their televisions to specific channels, TV ratings are important for commercial promotion, which means that the practice should fall under the regulations of the act.
According to a penalty given at the Fair Trade Commission’s 1,231st commission member meeting in 2015, the result of a TV ratings survey not only serves as a reference for operators through which they can improve the service to their viewers, it can also help businesses decide on allocation of and investment in commercials.
For this very reason, the commission said that the release of TV viewer ratings has a promotional effect that can attract business.
Thus, when TV operators use viewer ratings as a tool for marketing their programs, they should enclose all appropriate major information and avoid false or misleading information. Otherwise, such information could lead those who do business with them to make the wrong decision, potentially harming their rights and interests, as well as those of competing TV operators.
Based on the same legal reasoning, those who pay eateries, cafeterias and restaurants every month to set their televisions to specific channels have boosted viewer ratings in a dishonest or misleading way, and this could cause those who do business with those channels — for example, advertising agencies — to make incorrect decisions.
People should work together to fulfill their civic responsibility by revealing these sources. The government should also fulfill its legal responsibility by finding the manipulators and money flows that hide behind those who pay all these eateries, cafeterias and restaurants to lock their TVs on certain stations.
Huang Di-ying is a lawyer.
Translated by Eddy Chang
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS