Disinformation — the deliberate spreading of false or biased news to manipulate minds — is gaining ground around the world.
As China and Russia sink into authoritarianism and export their methods of censorship and media control, democracies find themselves overwhelmed by an incessant flow of propaganda that threatens the integrity of their institutions.
Taiwan, ranked first for democracy in Asia according to the Economist Intelligence Unit, is also the country that is targeted most by disinformation originating abroad, in this case China, the independent research institute V-Dem said.
The only bulwark against disinformation is a free, independent and plural media, prioritizing the public interest and conditioning the information it publishes on systematic verification of its sources.
However, Taiwanese media, which operate in a relatively free environment (Taiwan ranks 27th out of 180 in Reporters Without Borders’ [RSF] world press freedom ranking this year), too often neglect journalistic ethics for political or commercial reasons. As a result, only three in 10 Taiwanese say they trust the media according to a Reuters Institute survey conducted in 2022, one of the lowest percentages among democracies.
This climate of distrust gives disproportionate influence to platforms, in particular Facebook and Line, despite them being a major vector of false or biased information.
This credibility deficit for traditional media, a real Achilles heel of Taiwanese democracy, puts it at risk of being exploited for malicious purposes, with potentially dramatic consequences.
However, despite the urgency, no major reform has yet seen the light of day. It is true that in Taiwan any public policy affecting the supervision of the media systematically exposes its authors to the easy accusation of a “return to dictatorship.”
On the contrary, such a reform, if it adopted a co-regulation approach, returning journalism practitioners to their responsibilities, could ensure that the media as a whole serves the general public interest rather than that of their shareholders.
We suggest five areas of reform which seem easy to implement and would have a lasting impact:
First, adopt a regulatory framework that encourages and protects the independence of editorial staff vis-a-vis their employers and their boards of directors.
Second, expand the mandate of the broadcast regulator, the National Communications Commission (NCC), to cover all media, including print, online news sites and platforms, and strengthen its independence and resources.
Third, significantly increase, and maintain, the budgets allocated to public media so that they can benefit from the same visibility as private media and strengthen their guarantees of independence.
Fourth, support media outlets that are committed to respecting journalistic ethics, independent fact-checking initiatives and projects that aim to strengthen dialogue with the public.
Fifth, impose on large digital platforms an obligation of discoverability and appropriate moderation of reliable information sources, identified as such on the basis of an independent certification.
As part of a RSF delegation to Taiwan from Monday next week through Friday, we expect to meet President William Lai (賴清德), government and opposition officials, as well as a wide range of media and civil society representatives.
In these meetings we would emphasize the need for such reforms and introduce innovative solutions developed by RSF that can facilitate them, in particular the Forum on Information and Democracy, a laboratory for developing good practices; the Journalism Trust Initiative, the first media platform to receive a International Organization for Standardization certification; the Paris Charter on artificial intelligence and journalism; and the Propaganda Monitor, an observatory recently launched to analyze misinformation from authoritarian regimes.
We are convinced that Taiwan, a regional leader in press freedom and the only democracy in the Chinese-speaking world, has everything to gain from reforming its media regulations so that they are in line with international best practices.
It is at this price that Taiwanese media would regain public trust, a necessity not only to combat disinformation, but also to guarantee their own long-term survival in the face of the social media platforms’ hegemony. The future of journalism is linked to that of democracy and vice versa.
Thibaut Bruttin is the director-general of Reporters Without Borders. Cedric Alviani is the director of RSF’s Asia-Pacific bureau.
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase