Despite many difficulties, Taiwan on March 3 received 117,000 doses of the COVID-19 vaccine developed by AstraZeneca and the University of Oxford. While the arrival of the vaccine brought a glimmer of hope, it was immediately followed by lies that must be addressed.
To end the COVID-19 pandemic as soon as possible, the world has responded with an unprecedentedly fast development and rollout of vaccines.
Conspiracy theories about vaccine development have been around for decades, and the speedy development and production of COVID-19 vaccines have planted seeds of doubt in the minds of the public.
On March 3, the Poynter Institute for Media Studies, a US journalism school and research organization, fact-checked a viral video on vaccines in a report published on its Web site.
The video, released on YouTube by an account called “The Vaccinate Humanity Foundation,” said that five nurses had died from COVID-19 vaccines in the UK; that “COVID-19 pass cards” would be required to work, travel or hold a bank account; and that those who do not want to be vaccinated would be sent to re-education camps.
The institute’s method of fact-checking the video was so simple that anyone with basic English skills could do it.
It started by checking the organization that uploaded the video, but could not find its Web site. Despite the account’s claim that it was working with the UN and the “Bill Gates Foundation,” there was no information on cooperation on the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s Web site.
When fact-checking the claims made in the video, the institute found that Reuters had contacted British health authorities, and officials had said that the claims were false.
Does the Vaccinate Humanity Foundation YouTube channel — which exclusively spreads false vaccine information — still exist? Yes.
Although the video fact-checked by the institute was removed, three other videos were online at the time of this writing, titled “Covid-19 Vaccine Update — Mandatory Vaccines for Canadians,” “Health Canada says 6 nurses dead after taking Moderna vaccine” and “3 UK doctors die after taking Moderna vaccine.”
The last two videos are similar to the removed one, and only the location, number and occupations of the people who are said to have died are changed.
This time last year, when the COVID-19 situation began to be severe, a lot of false information circulated in Taiwan concerning virus prevention products, such as that an increase in mask production would exhaust the supply of raw materials needed for toilet paper.
Later, there was a rumor that the government had covered up a surge in deaths from COVID-19 in the nation.
When the US started its vaccine rollout in December last year, there was a rumor that a nurse had died immediately after being given a vaccine shot broadcast live on TV, and some Taiwanese media also spread the false information.
Motives for spreading false information might include seeking attention, having fun, or gaining economically or politically. It is difficult for the general public to judge whether a person or institution spreads false information systematically and in an organized manner.
However, if people rush to judge others who spread false information, they might also become engaged in a different form of conspiracy theory over the motives for the rumors.
Hope arrives, just as when fear rises. People easily lose their cool when there is a lack of knowledge or expectation, and they might try to find something, anything, to hold on to.
It is almost certain that a new wave of false information will hit Taiwan after the arrival of the AstraZeneca vaccine.
Anyone, whether in the news media or any other member of the public, should remain rational when confronted with this kind of information. Before they report or repost something, they should check the facts to reduce the risk of becoming a victim and accomplice of false information.
Since the government is promoting a new “post-COVID lifestyle” — wearing masks, washing hands frequently and practicing social distancing are apparently not enough — it should add “not spreading false information” to the list.
Chang Yueh-han is an assistant professor in Shih Hsin University’s Department of Journalism.
Translated by Eddy Chang
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
Whether in terms of market commonality or resource similarity, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co is the biggest competitor of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). The two companies have agreed to set up factories in the US and are also recipients of subsidies from the US CHIPS and Science Act, which was signed into law by former US president Joe Biden. However, changes in the market competitiveness of the two companies clearly reveal the context behind TSMC’s investments in the US. As US semiconductor giant Intel Corp has faced continuous delays developing its advanced processes, the world’s two major wafer foundries, TSMC and
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
We are witnessing a sea change in the government’s approach to China, from one of reasonable, low-key reluctance at rocking the boat to a collapse of pretense over and patience in Beijing’s willful intransigence. Finally, we are seeing a more common sense approach in the face of active shows of hostility from a foreign power. According to Article 2 of the 2020 Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法), a “foreign hostile force” is defined as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China [ROC]. The same stipulation applies to
RSS