Taiwan's first-ever presidential recall bid has come to a close. What concerns the public now is not so much the redrawing of political lines and agendas, but how the recall proceedings have further strained relations between the pan-greens and pan-blues. Some believe that President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has sought to shift the pressure from the scandals off himself and re-exert influence over his party by mobilizing pan-green supporters and re-framing the recall motion as a battle between localization and sinification supporters.
I believe that the pan-green supporters' reaction to recent events is a sign of their frustration with the constant barrage of biased news against Chen and his administration by the "pan-blue influenced" media.
Corruption allegations against the Chen administration have obviously disheartened pan-green supporters -- after all, the pan-green camp was elected on a platform of "clean governance." This image has been tarnished in the face of mounting allegations against Chen's family members and aides. The Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) dwindling poll numbers reflect the public's disillusionment with the ruling party.
However, it should be noted that the politicians and TV pundits who have brought these scandals to light also lack credibility. Many of these allegations were often made with scant evidence to back them up, and the public was encouraged to connect the dots in the absence of any genuine proof.
Media outlets have also run unfiltered segments on these alleged scandals non-stop, relentlessly needling and angering pan-green viewers. The recall motion presented the perfect opportunity for fed-up pan-green supporters to finally come forward and speak out against the media's biased and unprofessional coverage.
The pan-blue camp, together with certain media outlets, has sought to undermine the administration by attempting to paint, piece by piece, an ugly image of a scandal-infested presidency.
However, I would like to suggest to media outlets that have accused Chen of manipulating his supporters and deepening the divide between the pan-greens and the pan-blues to draw attention away from the scandals that they reflect on how they themselves have manipulated public opinion through biased journalism.
Media personalities or politicians should think about their political accountability before spewing out accusations, and the content of their accusations should be submitted to the proper authorities for official scrutiny.
News outlets should fulfill the basic requirements of fact-checking and verification. They should also allow the defendants to respond to the charges as a means of demonstrating journalistic fairness and objectivity.
The media have thrown any semblance of discipline out the window, as shown by the sheer amount of airtime given to personal attacks initiated by politicians and commentators who seem to think that "supplying evidence" and carrying out "independent verification" are foreign concepts.
As a result of this undisciplined reporting, the masses have difficulty distinguishing between what is true and false, and the media have failed to perform their most important function of presenting news accurately and conscientiously.
However, I am not proposing that the media should make their own political judgment or form their own political stand. Rather, when conducting news reports, the media should maintain a balanced structure that gives equal play to various news sources and parties, and work for the promotion of social values and the public interest. This is what is called "media ethics" -- a universal value that all media outlets should pursue.
It is a pity that the local media have chosen to ignore such ethics, resulting not only in the loss of their authority to ensure social justice, but also in their being exploited by certain politicians as a means to intensify ethnic and political divisions.
If media outlets continue to focus merely on the blue-green divide, how can we blame the public for questioning their veracity?
Lee Wen-chung is a Democratic Progressive Party legislator.
Translated by Daniel Cheng and Lin Ya-ti
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS