Imagine that the Taiwanese government for some reason forcibly sent back a few hundred Japanese or US passengers -- all who held legal visas to come here -- as they prepared to land at Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport. It would be a major human rights violation against foreigners in Taiwan. Imagine the lengthy media reports of these passengers' anger, the level of criticism that would be leveled against government officials at every level and the charges of dereliction of duty.
But that's a different story. Instead, a group of Taiwanese on their way to the Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region of China, were going to arrive close to the same time that the Chinese leader Hu Jintao (
The ceremonies praised the success of the "one country, two systems" model. Only a few Taiwanese media reported on these Taiwanese being turned back ? the Liberty Times (the Taipei Times' sister paper), Formosa TV, Chinese Television System, TVBS and the China Times.
These exceptions aside, the vast majority of media outlets were either blind to the event or gave only the briefest sketch of what happened. This begs the question: How much of our media is controlled by the Chinese Communist Party? And why are they only reporting on the celebrations and Hong Kong's glorious scenery?
It is true that the majority of the victims were Falun Gong students. But if Falun Gong students' legal and human rights can be violated, who knows what other Taiwanese person can be persecuted?
We all know that Falun Gong practioners are not the only ones to be oppressed by the Chinese Communist Party over the years. A short list would include Taiwanese businessmen, religious figures, democracy activists, people who belong to "objectionable" associations, the Uygur people, journalists and the countless Chinese cheated by corrupt public figures. One by one, each of these groups has suffered at the hands of the CCP.
Their goals are justice and a government that respects liberties and the rule of law. They want an end to collusion with and control over the media that prevents expositions on the injustice occurring throughout China. They only hope to see everyone respected and an end to cruel behavior.
However, the Chinese media can do nothing under the control of the system. Only a few respected journalists are still struggling to end censorship and expose corruption and privilege. Unfortunately, these people, just like other human rights activists, are often forced to resign, held in detention, and see their organizations closed down. For most of the media, they can merely play the role of a mouthpiece willingly or unwillingly under various regulations, in order to present the false appearance of peace and prosperity.
Isn't Taiwan a free society? Shouldn't its free media uncover all faults so as to protect people's rights?
Many friends in the media told me that their supervisors ordered them not to report anything about Falun Gong and its logo should never appear on TV because Chinese leaders do not like it. As a result, many Taiwanese media no longer report about it.
Behind the self-censorship, I believe that no journalist likes his or her freedoms curtailed. So what causes it? Lures or threats?
Various business and private exchanges between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are close.
The Taiwanese media certainly has the responsibility to protect people's right to know, as well as to supervise cross-strait human rights conditions. Hence, the amount of reporting local media do on cross-strait human right issues is a key index of freedom.
Flora Chang is a professor at National Taiwan University's Graduate Institute of Journalism.
TRANSLATED BY JASON COX AND EDDY CHANG
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
RSS