As President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) enters her second term, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) in an open letter reiterates its call for reforms to guarantee editorial independence and tackle conflicts of interest in the media as the only sustainable way to protect democracy against disinformation.
During last year’s presidential campaign, the government raised concerns that the Taiwanese media sector’s weaknesses could be instrumentalized by anti-democratic forces, particularly the Chinese regime, to influence the outcome of the election through disinformation.
The COVID-19 crisis, during which misleading “fake news” on how to protect against the virus is abundantly circulating online, shows again that disinformation not only endangers democracy, but also poses a threat to the health and even the lives of citizens.
In an open letter published in December last year in the Apple Daily and the Taipei Times, RSF, an international non-governmental organization defending journalism, urged presidential candidates and political parties to remedy these weaknesses once they took office.
As Tsai now enters her second four-year mandate with a comfortable majority in the Legislative Yuan, we reiterate our call for reforms to guarantee editorial independence and tackle conflicts of interest in the media, and insist that the expansion of ethical journalism practices is the only sustainable way to protect democracy against disinformation.
Where journalistic standards and ethics are not fully respected, disinformation finds fertile ground. It is unfortunately too often the case in Taiwan where sensationalism, undeclared advertising and “blue-green” political polarization hinder journalism in its role to empower citizens through the provision of unbiased information.
Taiwan does not lack competent journalists, but most of them face working under undue pressure and cannot count on effective legal protection against requests from the boardroom that contradict journalistic ethics. This explains how the mainstream media loses the trust of a growing part of the public, who as a result tends to become an easy target for disinformation campaigns.
Despite having long recognized the problem, successive governments have not properly addressed it, invoking the principle of “freedom of the press” as an excuse for inaction. We insist that press freedom should not be misinterpreted as the right of media owners to freely disseminate content that suits their interests. Like any other freedom, it requires proper regulations and democratic control to be fully effective and deter abuse.
Freedom of opinion and expression as protected by Article 19 of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights needs the implementation of safeguards to promote independence, pluralism and trustworthiness of news and information.
When confronted with disinformation, experience shows that responses limited to palliative measures do not bring sustainable effects. While it is indeed legitimate to seek reparation from the media that neglect fact-checking or intentionally spread harmful content, these actions take place long after the damage is done and do not discourage offenders motivated by an agenda.
Moreover, suggestions for the government or Internet platforms to “block” or “correct” false narratives are dangerous for democracy if those mechanisms and algorithms do not fall under a principles-based scrutiny. A ministry of truth would be one of the worst dangers. But the absence of promotion of trustworthiness of news and information is also a danger, since current digital ecosystems give a competitive advantage to false, manipulative and extremist content.
Journalism ought to provide citizens with the best tools to understand and participate in public affairs. It is also the only sustainable way for democracy to develop a natural immunity against disinformation by filtering and debunking “fake news” before it becomes viral and providing trustworthy content as an alternative.
When journalists are given sufficient time and resources to adhere to the highest ethical standards and when editorial departments have the ability to reject commercial and political pressure, public trust in the media will naturally improve and manipulated content will fall on deaf ears.
We believe the Taiwanese media sector’s reform should embrace the five measures detailed in our previous open letter, namely: support journalism by strengthening independence of the newsroom from the boardroom; establish an independent and transparent judicial process against disinformation outside of the executive’s control; drastically scale up public media’s resources and strengthen guarantees of independence; provide economic support for ethical journalism; and make media literacy an integral part of the education system.
This reform should be placed above partisan disputes and involve the media themselves, as well as representatives of civil society. We recommend that it follows the guidelines set by the Declaration on Information and Democracy and the standards set by the Journalism Trust Initiative, two programs initiated by RSF with the purpose of promoting a free circulation of information safeguarded by democratic guarantees (to be implemented by digital platforms) and the expansion of journalistic norms and ethics.
Considering the efficiency shown by the Taiwanese authorities in their handling of the coronavirus crisis, we have no doubt that they will diligently implement these measures if the government makes it a priority. We are convinced that such reform would allow Taiwan, currently ranked 43nd out of 180 in the RSF World Press Freedom Index, to fight disinformation effectively while strengthening its international prestige.
We sincerely hope that President Tsai will embrace this opportunity to lay the last brick of Taiwanese democracy by establishing the excellence of its media environment, making it an example for the world and an even stronger counter-model to the authoritarian system in China.
Christophe Deloire is secretary-general of Reporters Without Borders.
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS