The purpose of epidemic response news conferences is precisely what it says: to respond to an epidemic. In this age of social media, people’s attention is precious. These news conferences are about an important issue that affects people’s lives, which is an advantage in attracting attention. When used properly, they efficiently promote epidemic prevention measures, but if this advantage is wasted and the briefings are used for issues unrelated to the epidemic, the audience loses patience.
Taiwan’s initial COVID-19 outbreak last year abated quickly. As time went by, the Central Epidemic Command Center’s news conferences were increasingly used for promoting farm products and stimulating local economies. Although this was done with people’s livelihoods in mind, the events strayed from their purpose, attracting criticism.
As a resident of Taipei, I expect the city government’s epidemic response news conferences to provide useful information on disease prevention and answer queries the public might have.
However, on Sept. 15, Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) used a reporter’s question to discuss doubts raised by the Ministry of the Interior about social housing. At the time, I said that the next time reporters ask questions unrelated to the topic, Ko might find it hard to justify not answering.
Since that day, the city has held seven more epidemic response news conferences, at each of which reporters asked 10 to 20 questions and follow-ups.
On Sept. 24 there were questions about Taiwan joining the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, social housing and the academic credentials of Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Legislator Ann Kao (高虹安).
On Sept. 27, a reporter asked whether supporters of Sun Yat-sen School president Chang Ya-chung (張亞中) might join the TPP, which the reporter said might cause a split in the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Another asked about newly elected KMT Chairman Eric Chu’s (朱立倫) reply to a congratulatory telegram from Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and a third asked about the Taipei Department of Civil Affairs’ policy to encourage people to get married.
On Sept. 29, there were questions about appointments in the Taipei Parks and Street Lights Office, the TPP’s approach to cross-strait issues and its plans for the Taipei City Council election, as well as about Kao’s apology for singing a song that mocks supporters of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
On Oct. 4, reporters asked questions about statues of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) on school and college campuses, footage of a Swiss mountain featuring in a Ministry of Foreign Affairs promotional film, the National Human Rights Commission’s budget, how many followers President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has on Instagram, media attacks on Ko and questions about the TPP’s strategy for the city council election.
On Oct. 6, a reporter asked whether the DPP had double standards and another asked about the location of the high-speed rail’s future terminus in Yilan County.
On Oct. 8, reporters asked how the TPP was using its income from political donations, whether Ko would cooperate with Hon Hai Precision Industry Co (鴻海精密) founder Terry Gou (郭台銘) and where one could buy a bowl of oyster noodles for NT$20, as well as a final question about Taiwan Statebuilding Party Legislator Chen Po-wei (陳柏惟).
The second half of the epidemic response news conferences’ question-and-answer session no longer has anything to do with epidemic prevention.
The unrelated questions belong to two main categories:
The first is related to city governance. Ko’s mayorship stresses efficiency, so it is understandable if he thinks he can save resources by using this opportunity to answer questions about city governance.
However, the TPP’s election strategy, and Ko’s views on other parties’ policies and personnel, are party matters that have nothing to do with city governance. He really should not respond to such questions on these occasions.
If reporters ask questions outside the framework of a news conference, that is an expression of their autonomy, but the Taipei City Government should not use its epidemic prevention resources to discuss party affairs and promote personal political ideas.
Taipei residents’ interest in epidemic prevention measures should not be abused for such unrelated matters.
Chang Yueh-han holds a doctorate in journalism and communications from Shih Hsin University.
Translated by Julian Clegg
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS