I've been following the news about TVBS news and Taiwan's recent media situation. Although some opinions are highly questionable, given the nature of Taiwan's (and perhaps most liberal democracies) poor journalistic performance in terms of indiscriminate reporting and oversimplified analyses, I wish to bring attention to several points.
First, as is true with any other jurisdiction, Taiwan has a unique socio-political background. Unlike the US, where corporate dominance over media outlets controls the main thrust of discussion on media reform, Taiwan is liberal and open in terms of private ownership of the media. In fact, most of the population receives their news via privately owned media.
While the public in the US has begun to realize and take action against how private media manipulates or even "manufactures consent," the Taiwanese public is not as aware of such practices as their US counterparts, and even welcomes the freedom of press in its most extreme form, despite the corporate bias of most news sources.
Furthermore, Taiwanese politics is not divided into conservative and progressive camps. According to the article "What Taiwan wants" in last year's March issue of Asia Times magazine, the big question for Taiwan is the nationalistic sentiment towards Taiwan and/or China. The media present themes that can alter or mobilize certain nationalistic sentiments.
Given the fact that China is still hostile and aggressive towards the Taiwanese desire for self-determination, this situation cannot -- and should not -- be simplified as a simple domestic political standoff, or a "witch hunt" of the dissidents.
The historical and political background needs to be thoroughly investigated before any viable observations can be made. It is academically dangerous to decontextualize any issues in Taiwan, because in many cases they are as complicated as they are sensitive.
Second, according to the reports, one argument has been that if the government does shut down TVBS, Taiwan would be no different from China in terms of the freedom of press.
I would argue that it is already difficult for a nascent democracy like Taiwan to maintain its sovereignty and preserve a pluralistic public opinion over the destiny of the country's future in the face of the pro-unification, militant voice of the People's Republic of China (PRC).
The issue at hand is not whether the freedom of press in Taiwan should be carefully nurtured and protected -- ? it should. The issue is this: what must be done to ensure an independent press, when there is an authoritarian and aggressive regime (the PRC) that threatens press freedom in Taiwan to achieve its own end? It is obvious that Beijing has launched a propaganda as well as an economic war machine to threaten Taiwan's democracy on all fronts.
Third, the issue is strictly a legal matter. Anyone can tell that the Democratic Progressive Party has taken an unwise political step at the wrong time. It brought up the issue of foreign shareholding in private media (TVBS) right after being grilled on political scandals by that very same media group.
However, despite the poor political tactics, it is true that the citizenship of the majority of TVBS' shareholders is, to put it delicately, questionable.
Article 10, Chapter 1 of the Satellite Broadcasting Law (衛星廣播電視法) explicitly states: "The total shares of a satellite broadcasting business directly held by foreign shareholders shall be less than 50 percent of the total shares issued by the said business."
Therefore, this issue ought to be reviewed and discussed, as we are believers of liberal democracy and freedom of speech.
It is a crucial fact that the shareholding body of TVBS is possibly subject to the control of Beijing, which has been a verbal, political, economic and military aggressor toward Taiwan. Would the US public, let alone the Bush administration, allow the subjects of its chief military antagonist to control the means of information inside the US?
Lastly, although President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has vowed not to shut down any media outlet during his tenure, it does not detract from the fact that Taiwan has often been the victim of over-simplification by international observers, who examine Taiwan's current state of affairs divorced from its socio-historical context.
Taiwan faces multifaceted threats to freedom and democracy from a bullying neighbor, and the means to information should not be controlled or manipulated by foreigners, especially those with ties to the antagonist state.
Chang Jiho
Taipei
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS