My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting.
A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels, six were Chinese — including China Central Television, several regional Chinese stations and a channel from Hong Kong. Three were news stations.
It is shocking that a major hotel in Taiwan would so openly provide Chinese TV channels and news stations, and in such disproportionate numbers. Meanwhile, several well-known and credible international news stations were absent from the hotel’s offerings.
Taiwan claims to embrace globalization and has expressed aims to become a bilingual and international society, yet it is effectively isolating itself by locking its perspective into the framework of Chinese-produced television programs.
It is well-known that China does not have press freedom — its news stations are state-owned and operated, serving only to praise the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and lacking fair and objective reporting. In contrast, several news channels based in Taiwan take a clear, pro-China stance, often maliciously criticizing Taiwan’s government, while reporting on China with yearning and admiration.
Such Taiwanese media — which specialize in discrediting Taiwan’s democratic government and glorifying an authoritarian regime — in addition to Chinese news stations that aim to indoctrinate, have been made available for Taiwanese and foreign travelers’ enjoyment. That would undoubtedly deal a serious blow to Taiwan’s image of internationalization.
Taipei is a leading city, and as such, it should become a window into Taiwan for the international community. In addition to broadening the global perspective of Taiwanese, it should also serve as a benchmark city that allows foreign visitors to witness the level of the nation’s internationalization.
However, judging by the selection of TV channels available at hotels in Taipei, it seems that there is instead self-restriction. Airing an excessive number of Chinese TV channels diminishes Taiwan’s international standing.
Taiwan’s hotels seem all too willing and eager to broadcast Chinese state-run news, generously helping the CCP promote itself and embellish its international image. It appears that, for Taipei to truly achieve internationalization, it should start by diversifying the TV channels offered in its hotels.
Chen Chi-nung is a political commentator.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
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
RSS