Some academics once suggested that news media be operated by those with the most knowledge, wisdom and virtue. The reason was quite simple: Since news media are influential, they may have a negative impact if they are operated by those without social responsibility.
Perhaps these academics' standards were too high. However, the whole society will pay a price if our media are not in the hands of professionals.
Getting "scoops" is certainly the goal for all reporters. But since a scoop is "exclusive," reporters and editors should have much higher standards for the credibility of such reports. At the very least, the "scoop" should meet basic professional requirements of accuracy, objectivity and fairness. Otherwise, how can such "news" meet the test of both society and the media themselves?
Exclusive news should be obtained through legal methods and reasonable processes. Exclusives obtained through dirty tricks hurt the media's efforts to bolster its credibility.
In fact, some methods of getting a news story have become jokes. Take Paul Burrell for example. The former butler of Diana, Princess of Wales, wrote A Royal Duty to expose royal secrets, and his book was published last year. According to Burrell, the Daily Mirror in fact paid him ?300,000 (about US$550,000) in order to publish the content of his book in installments, including Diana's note to him, which reads: "My husband is planning `an accident' in my car, brake failure and serious head injury in order to make the path clear for him to marry."
A recent example is the case of British royal servant George Smith, who suggested falsely to a tabloid that Prince Charles of Wales was having a homosexual relationship with a servant -- in order to get a hefty reward. When such "checkbook journalism" -- in which a publication pays interviewees to answer questions -- becomes a popular new term in journalism, shouldn't we be worried about the situation?
Violating the privacy of others and selling out friends is despicable. But these newspapers' method of gathering news by offering money is also questionable. A reporter should obtain a news story through his or her knowledge, sensitivity, judgment and personal connections. Any involvement in crooked dealings or luring sources with money is unworthy of the profession, and damages the dignity and image of reporters' professionalism.
Recently, many of the media's self-proclaimed "exclusive" stories have caused the public to doubt the media. Some television stations so frequently claim that their reports are "exclusive, that we're unsure whether to laugh or cry.
An article published in The Journalist recently described such exclusive reports as "a poison to professionalism." This description was absolutely right. The author wrote, "The local electronic media's `Taiwanese-style' scoops include almost everything ... This is proof of the electronic media's decline."
Although this is a very serious accusation, it serves as a warning for our journalists to examine their methods. Traditionally, a "scoop" is proof of a media outlet's hard work and effort, and shows the media's concern for informing their viewers better than other outlets. Categorizing reports about hot springs or auctions as "scoops," is a humiliation to the entire profession.
We all understand that competition among the news media is fierce and that the pressure on journalists is intense. But which profession is without pressure?
If we simply sacrifice ethics and restrictions due to pressure, our past efforts to improve news professionalism could be in vain.
Cheng Jim-ming is a professor in the Graduate Institute of Journalism at Chinese Culture University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS