On Friday, Beijing answered a question foreign correspondents in China have no doubt eagerly awaited: Would it scrap loosened rules for foreign media now that the Olympics have passed? The answer was no. The Chinese Communist Party extended the rules that it introduced more than a year ago.
Back then, Beijing was compelled by promises made to the International Olympic Committee to give media free rein during the Games. Today, its insincerity is equally apparent: The laxer regulations will not apply to China’s own press corps.
China has complained that foreign reporters do not understand the country well enough and produce biased reports on developments there. Yet it remains a mystery why Beijing will not afford these same, basic freedoms to domestic media, who understand China and have undergone decades of political indoctrination in an environment replete with propaganda. If Beijing can’t trust these people to produce reports to its taste, it might do well to ask itself why.
Censoring its own journalists has at times had dire consequences, yet Beijing refuses to loosen its grip. The state-imposed silence as an outbreak of enterovirus spread in March brought to mind the SARS debacle. Likewise, Reporters without Borders has accused Beijing of stifling early reports of the melamine scandal, when parents should have been informed post haste about the danger posed to their children’s health.
China also kept a tight grip on reporting about the corruption trial of former Beijing vice mayor Liu Zhihua (劉志華), who played a key role in preparations for the Olympics and has just been sentenced to death.
Among the rule changes that apply to foreign correspondents are free movement within China and freedom to interview any citizen. This looks great on paper, but as observed over the last year and a half, the new regulations may have simply been a publicity stunt.
Complaints gathered by the Foreign Correspondents Club in Beijing indicate there have been at least 336 violations so far of the increased rights promised to reporters from abroad. In particular, the physical abuse of several foreign reporters during the Beijing Olympics shocked the international community.
Beijing also came out with extra restrictions on who foreign journalists could hire as assistants, guides and translators — designed to make it easier for authorities to keep an eye on those who help reporters and thus the reporters themselves.
Reports have emerged of those who speak to foreign journalists being harassed or assaulted afterwards.
China has shown scant concern for these violations and other problems, meaning there is little reason to believe any of this will change.
Recently a CNN correspondent met furtively with a lawyer counseling parents who hope to sue milk companies responsible for their children’s medical bills. Good reporting may remain a matter of getting to the source of information before authorities know who you intend to interview.
China can afford to extend the measures for foreign journalists because empty gestures are cheap. Meanwhile, the only people who stand to gain from the muzzle on local reporters are businesses and officials uninterested in shouldering responsibility for their actions and scared of swelling public discontent.
Taiwan’s semiconductor industry gives it a strategic advantage, but that advantage would be threatened as the US seeks to end Taiwan’s monopoly in the industry and as China grows more assertive, analysts said at a security dialogue last week. While the semiconductor industry is Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” its dominance has been seen by some in the US as “a monopoly,” South Korea’s Sungkyunkwan University academic Kwon Seok-joon said at an event held by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In addition, Taiwan lacks sufficient energy sources and is vulnerable to natural disasters and geopolitical threats from China, he said.
After reading the article by Hideki Nagayama [English version on same page] published in the Liberty Times (sister newspaper of the Taipei Times) on Wednesday, I decided to write this article in hopes of ever so slightly easing my depression. In August, I visited the National Museum of Ethnology in Osaka, Japan, to attend a seminar. While there, I had the chance to look at the museum’s collections. I felt extreme annoyance at seeing that the museum had classified Taiwanese indigenous peoples as part of China’s ethnic minorities. I kept thinking about how I could make this known, but after returning
What value does the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) hold in Taiwan? One might say that it is to defend — or at the very least, maintain — truly “blue” qualities. To be truly “blue” — without impurities, rejecting any “red” influence — is to uphold the ideology consistent with that on which the Republic of China (ROC) was established. The KMT would likely not object to this notion. However, if the current generation of KMT political elites do not understand what it means to be “blue” — or even light blue — their knowledge and bravery are far too lacking
Taipei’s population is estimated to drop below 2.5 million by the end of this month — the only city among the nation’s six special municipalities that has more people moving out than moving in this year. A city that is classified as a special municipality can have three deputy mayors if it has a population of more than 2.5 million people, Article 55 of the Local Government Act (地方制度法) states. To counter the capital’s shrinking population, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) held a cross-departmental population policy committee meeting on Wednesday last week to discuss possible solutions. According to Taipei City Government data, Taipei’s