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
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
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,
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
RSS