The review committee of the National Communications Commission (NCC) held its public hearings for nominees between Dec. 9 and Dec. 11. As one of the 11 committee members, I witnessed the pan-blue camp's maneuvers. The pro-blue reviewers, who tried to assert their professionalism during the review process, talked the talk, but did not walk the walk.
According to the Organic Law of the National Communications Commission (國家通訊傳播委員會組織法), which was signed into law by President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) on Nov. 9, the NCC will take over from the Ministry of Transportation and Communications and the Government Information Office as the authority in charge of issuing or renewing media licenses, enacting media regulations and meting out punishment.
Despite the significance of the NCC's establishment, the local media did not pay much attention to the three-day review process. Perhaps it was a result of the structure of the review committee, which was made up of six pro-blue and five pro-green reviewers. Since the law states that a nominee needs just more than half of the votes in the second round of the review process, it became a power struggle among the political parties. Did the media pay so little attention to the review process because it was superficial?
In fact, some reviewers had already sent questions to the nominees and received written answers beforehand. Also, the review process was open to the public and broadcast online in real time. It was transparent, rational and serious.
Three consensuses were reached during the process. First, the excessive number of TV news stations and their pursuit of ratings have often damaged quality. Second, the NCC is an independent body -- unlike the Fair Trade Commission, the NCC members do not have to attend meetings of the Executive Yuan. Third, the digital gap should be narrowed to bridge the gap between different social classes as well as urban and rural areas.
Still, in terms of unlicensed radio stations, the pan-blue camp's reviewers were mostly in favor of a crackdown disregarding historical factors and realistic obstacles, and I repeatedly opposed this. There were also several debates on the restriction against foreign capital in the media, and most reviewers agreed that it is acceptable to limit foreign investment on scarce wireless frequencies and telecommunication networks for the sake of national security, public order and local culture.
But when the reviewers cast their ballots, the pan-blue camp's reviewers had reached an agreement in advance to vote for just nine nominees, while the pan-green camp's reviewers kindly voted for 13 nominees. As a result, almost all the pan-blue camp's nominees passed the threshold in the first round, except for Lee Tzu-yuan (李祖源), former general manager of the Broadcasting Corp of China, who had been nominated by the People First Party (PFP). National Chiao Tung University professor Lin Yi-bing (林一平) and National Chengchi University professor Liu Zong-de (劉宗德) even got the committee's full support by winning 11 votes each.
As for the pan-green camp's nominees, National Dong Hwa University professor Howard Shyr (石世豪) and National Chengchi University professor Weng Shieu-chi (翁秀琪) passed by winning eight and seven votes respectively. Nominees who needed to win more than half the votes in the second round had to rely on the mercy of the pan-blue camp's reviewers.
After witnessing this unpleasant voting process, I quickly withdrew and left the battlefield.
Chen I-shen is an associate researcher in the Institute of Modern History at Academia Sinica and the deputy chairman of the Northern Society.
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.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
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
RSS