An argument about an inadequate supply of free rice at a stir-fry restaurant prompted some National Taipei University of Technology students to give the restaurant a string of negative one-star online reviews. The restaurant owner then tried to enlist public opinion against the students’ online “trial” by complaining to the news media.
To begin with, both sides thought they could stand on the high ground and watch the other side get swept away, but unexpectedly news media and the Internet interacted in a way that overwhelmed them both. Both sides were battered and wanted to stop the fight, but the spectators insisted that the show must go on.
One factor that has received little attention is the issue of Internet literacy.
In the “post-truth era,” everyone thinks they are seeing the truth, but the truth they find is the “truth as interpreted or judged by each individual” and “the truth as seen by social groups.”
To attract more clicks and views, some online media exaggerate their headlines and content to make them as “shocking” as possible. Internet readers and viewers who spot news stories of this kind would often start “throwing stones,” slinging all sorts of negative comments and messages at the accused party. However, such stories might only be partly true or present only part of the facts, which can easily cause Internet users to misjudge the situation and unjustly attack the people involved.
In November last year, there was an incident in which a fried chicken restaurant owner “yelled” at a teenager with Down syndrome. When the story was first reported, it drew a lot of negative comments online, with most saying the restaurant owner “had no conscience” and “bullied the Down syndrome kid.”
The teenager’s mother later handed out a leaflet in the local community, after which the restaurant owner cut his wrist due to all the stress and was taken to hospital.
This prompted a tide of negative messages attacking the mother, saying things like: “Will you only be happy when you drive this person to death?”
These examples show that “Internet justice” tends to sympathize with the underdog. In the rice incident, as soon as the restaurant owner announced that he was suspending business indefinitely, the tide of negative comments turned against the students, saying things like: “Are you happy to have forced the owner to shut down his business and put his staff out of a job?” Some media outlets even behaved like spectators, spicing up the story with headlines like “Stir-fry boss throws in the towel.”
“Internet justice” has several characteristics. First, it is easily incited. Second, it easily pulls a crowd. Third, it can easily switch positions. These features show how shallow and volatile “Internet justice” can be. It can quickly build up pressure and become a powerful weapon to attack opponents, but if it is overmanipulated or people see through its intentions, it could spin out of control and backfire on whoever is manipulating it.
To avoid acting like a herd, Internet users should have basic Internet literacy. When you first see a “shocking” online news story or message, resist the temptation to immediately comment based on your gut feeling.
Start by asking yourself three questions. First, is it fake news? Second, is it only partly true, or only one side of the story? Third, are there any alternative opinions? There will still be time to comment after clearing up these questions. In conclusion, apart from media literacy, Internet literacy should be another important policy objective for governments to educate the public.
Hsu Chih-ming is an assistant professor at Shih Hsin University’s Department of Journalism.
Translated by Julian Clegg
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
Taiwan is confronting escalating threats from its behemoth neighbor. Last month, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army conducted live-fire drills in the East China Sea, practicing blockades and precision strikes on simulated targets, while its escalating cyberattacks targeting government, financial and telecommunication systems threaten to disrupt Taiwan’s digital infrastructure. The mounting geopolitical pressure underscores Taiwan’s need to strengthen its defense capabilities to deter possible aggression and improve civilian preparedness. The consequences of inadequate preparation have been made all too clear by the tragic situation in Ukraine. Taiwan can build on its successful COVID-19 response, marked by effective planning and execution, to enhance