In recent years, my study sponsored by the National Science Council has focused on the media, social capital and political trust. The basis of my hypothesis is that since the opening up of television stations in Taiwan, the plethora of TV talk shows that ensued have provided people who formerly had no way of making their opinions heard with a chance to participate in debates on public affairs, promoting the development of civil society.
However, over the last few years, we have seen talk show upon talk show appear on our TV screens, creating large numbers of celebrity hosts and guests, and this was even more apparent during the election period. But how much does this actually contribute to social capital? And has it improved political trust?
Western countries attached great importance to social capital at the end of the 20th century, with the belief that social divisions need not be resolved through violent confrontation. Instead, a democratic society should be based on the mutual trust and cooperation of everyone within the community. The media has the role of being a catalyst in this process, providing information to everyone in civil society. Therefore, even if differences do exist, conflict can be resolved by mutual trust through peaceful means, highlighting the essence of democracy.
Taiwanese cable TV news stations have gained fame and profit over the last few years, with relatively low running costs. All they need are a few SNG vans manned with low-paid youngsters right out of school, scouting the streets for anything newsworthy enough to push up their viewer ratings.
Chat shows will never be short of guests who know that sufficient exposure assures them celebrity status: you can see them every night, talking about everything and anything, desperate to come up with a fresh take on their subject.
During the election period the news channels stood to gain much from covering election rallies, but the damage this has done to social capital exceeds the benefits. The crowds that gathered outside the Presidential Office after the election added to a general feeling of foreboding and dissipated the trust that people had in certain institutions and individuals. Given this, what kind of social capital are the people of Taiwan to rely on in their quest for a civil society? And how are they to continue to put their trust in Taiwan's political institutions?
Of course, political leanings toward a particular political party or candidate are also common in the media of democratic countries in the West, but the news media should never lose sight of the principles of justice and objectivity.
Hate speech resulting from the Oklahoma blasts led to criticism and reflections within the academic world and the news media, and despite the fact that there are still echoes of it within the minority media and on the Internet, it is currently frowned upon within the mainstream media.
And the media in this country? How many political stances and demonstrations of emotion are we going to find within the newspapers? The superficiality and narrowness of the TV news, the subject matter of talk shows, together with comments by the hosts and countless guests, are all a far cry from what we should expect from the media in a civil society.
Taiwan is now at a turning point. The media have a responsibility to prevent Taiwanese society from sinking any further and put an emphasis on love and compassion. The media are, after all, a tool of society, and should publish and report more things beneficial to social capital, and restrict the reportage of any matters that could damage it.
Peng Yun is a professor in the department of journalism at the National Chengchi University.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS