Recent media coverage of a series of political events has clearly, crudely and sadly illustrated the double standards that are applied to pan-green and pan-blue politicians.
The pro-China media in Taiwan enjoys a disproportionate presence in the local news market -- this much everyone knows. But their biased and selective reporting in such a brazen manner has become almost sickening.
Take the coverage of pan-blue legislators' sensational allegations against first lady Wu Shu-jen (
With the pro-China media so eager to dance to the pan-blue camp's tune, it seemed as if Wu was Taiwan's version of Imelda Marcos.
Sure, Wu has drawn much criticism for her investment activities. And given her position as first lady, she should have known better than to engage in commercial activities or meet with the executives of state-owned enterprises. Such conduct was, at the very least, stupid.
However, the critical -- some would say libelous -- coverage of Wu was out of all proportion to her alleged misdeeds, especially when compared with coverage of the KMT. The KMT's stalled deal last December to sell the party's three media outlets to the China Times Group has recently been clouded in controversy. Originally the China Times Group wanted to buy all three outlets from the KMT; now it seems they don't have the money to do so.
The whole thing smells like a sweetheart deal for one of the KMT's pro-China media pals. Naturally enough, KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
And then there was the news earlier this week that a number of Ma's Taipei City Government staff took more than 30 days of official leave to prepare for a Dragon Boat race. Had this happened while President Chen Shui-bian (
But Ma, the media darling, was able to work his way out of the controversy with the response: "The city government is keen to promote the concept of a health-conscious city."
"Clean" and "transparent" were the catchwords of Ma's campaign for the KMT chairmanship last June. How much "cleanliness" and "transparency" has he really implemented since then? And how much attention has the nation's media been paying to this matter? The short answer to both questions is: not very much.
The KMT recently announced that its vice chairwoman Lin Cheng-chih (林澄枝) would be stepping down, with the vacancy to be filled by Legislator Chang Jen-chian (章仁香). Many members of the KMT's Central Standing Committee -- supposedly the highest decision-making body of the party -- weren't even aware that the appointment had been made. So much for Ma's transparency.
The media have a responsibility to keep the powerful in check. If the pro-China media really want Ma to win the 2008 presidential election, what they ought to do, for the sake of the country's welfare, is keep him to his word.
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