The Taipei District Prosecutors’ Office decided not to press charges against a United Daily News (UDN) journalist for reporting false information, saying the journalist had been given a falsified document. This was a good decision, as it puts to rest concerns over freedom of the press in Taiwan.
Coming down hard on the UDN journalist so close to the next presidential election might have also put the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in a quagmire, as the opposition would undoubtedly have used it to attack the DPP’s candidate, Vice President William Lai (賴清德).
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has already accused the DPP of curbing press freedom, following the National Communications Commission decision on Nov. 18, 2020, not to renew CTi News’ broadcast license for “repeated violations of regulations and the failure of its internal discipline and control mechanisms.”
However, the false UDN report also shows how socially disruptive disinformation can be, and how vulnerable Taiwan’s media are. The Chinese Communist Party regularly targets Taiwan with disinformation as part of its “united front” efforts.
Taiwan must use a multifaceted approach to tackle the issue, amending legislation, improving media literacy, and bolstering media ethics and accountability.
Legislation would only be effective in cases where prosecutors could prove intent, and litigation targeting individual journalists rather than media companies would prove unpopular — and could be deemed an erosion of democratically guaranteed rights. Media outlets should be encouraged to boost checks and balances to ensure proper fact checking and neutrality in non-editorial content.
Prosecutors said the UDN reporter had failed to check facts with the Executive Yuan, and said his verification process was not “adequate” or “thorough.”
Regardless of the UDN journalist’s intentions, Chinese state media have shared the story and implied that reports about US-Taiwan cooperation on biotechnology weapons were true. It is not unlikely that the “South Sea Work Meeting Minutes” the reporter cited in the story were fabricated by a Chinese content farm — and regurgitated by Taiwanese media, as has happened. This is also corroborated by wording used in the minutes such as “our party,” which is not commonplace in Taiwan.
The reporter should have noticed this non-standard terminology, and even had they missed it, the UDN’s copy editors should have picked it up. Fact checking is crucial to journalistic integrity, especially for stories with such major political implications — Allowing journalists or media companies to skirt this responsibility by claiming they received bad information sets a dangerous precedent.
The DPP said on March 18 that it would establish a committee to tackle disinformation.
Information clarity would be provided through graphics, short videos and messages to swiftly communicate with the public, DPP Deputy Secretary-General Huang Chien-chia (黃建嘉) said.
A system for informing the public about fake news is crucial, but it cannot come from one political party alone, as this would only lead to accusations of that party attempting to control information.
Taiwan needs an independent body comprising members of all major political parties — or unassociated or impartial individuals — that would investigate and flag potential disinformation, which could also be aided by artificial intelligence.
With the presidential election drawing near, Chinese disinformation will be of growing concern. The government must implement an impartial system to effectively inform the public about questionable sources of information, and must find a balanced way of enforcing laws against the spread of disinformation without infringing on constitutional rights.
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
Minister of National Defense Wellington Koo (顧立雄) has said that the armed forces must reach a high level of combat readiness by 2027. That date was not simply picked out of a hat. It has been bandied around since 2021, and was mentioned most recently by US Senator John Cornyn during a question to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio at a US Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Tuesday. It first surfaced during a hearing in the US in 2021, when then-US Navy admiral Philip Davidson, who was head of the US Indo-Pacific Command, said: “The threat [of military
RSS