Freedom of the press is one of a list of achievements Taiwan has to show for its journey down a long and difficult road to democracy. The improvement made in this field has been recognized in recent years by international organizations, including Reporters Without Borders in its annual Worldwide Press Freedom Index and Freedom House in its annual report on media freedom.
In the last two years, Taiwan was ranked by Freedom House as Asia’s freest media environment. The report cited the government’s respect for the independence of the judiciary and the freedoms of speech and the media enshrined in the Constitution.
“Taiwanese media are vigorous and lively,” the report said, “regularly criticizing government policy and top officials.”
Less than five months after the transfer of power, however, the government has come under fire from the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ).
In a searing statement, the IFJ said it “condemns Taiwan’s apparent interference in state-owned media and urges government authorities to refrain from further acts that could jeopardize editorial independence.”
The condemnation came in the wake of allegations that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government meddles in the media. Cheng Yu (鄭優), chairman of the state-owned Radio Taiwan International, said last week the government had asked the station not to broadcast reports that were too critical of China.
This allegation was followed by an open letter penned by the Central News Agency (CNA) deputy editor-in-chief, Chuang Feng-chia (莊豐嘉), saying that the agency’s reporters were often asked to drop reports that were deemed critical of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his administration.
CNA, also state-owned, has in recent years become a key news agency that feeds around-the-clock reports to media outlets and subscribers.
In its early years, CNA was the KMT’s servant. Gradually, however, the organization made the transition from a KMT mouthpiece to a media outlet after then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) assigned liberals to head the organization.
In his letter lamenting the loss of partiality in CNA’s reporting, Chuang, who resigned from his post, said: “If one day news reports by CNA were selective, incomplete, or even biased ... wouldn’t it be CNA’s downfall if the day came when people read CNA news with the same skepticism they have for Xinhua news agency?”
Oppression of the media is a sure sign that a nation’s democratic values are in trouble.
The Government Information Office has rebutted the claims of meddling, but the IFJ’s concerns indicate Taiwan’s reputation for press freedom may already have sustained damage.
One of Ma’s countless pledges comes to mind: “We will endeavor to create an environment that is humane, rational and pluralistic ... encourage healthy competition in politics and respect the media’s monitoring of the government and freedom of the press.”
That statement, made during his inaugural speech, may have been little more than an act.
“The government will not stand in the way of social progress, but rather serve as the engine that drives it,” Ma said.
Talk is cheap. Maintaining the nation’s young but proud record on press freedoms, however, is priceless.
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS