Dec. 10 marked the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19 of which reads: “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
It is ironic that the Public Television Service Foundation (PTS), a platform for public dialog and debate, is relying on commercials placed by supporters to argue its case. The purpose is to argue that the station, which is already having difficulties, should not be further stifled by new regulations. They call on the legislature to release NT$450 million (US$14 million) from the station’s budget that has been frozen for nearly a year.
PTS also said that while three public television channels — Taiwan Indigenous Television, Taiwan Hakka Television and Taiwan Macroview Television — serve people for whom, respectively, the Council of Indigenous Peoples, the Council for Hakka Affairs and the Overseas Compatriot Affairs Commission are responsible, these government departments should allow the stations to maintain responsibility for programming and not, as is being proposed, direct their day-to-day affairs.
PTS was established a decade ago, and the Taiwan Broadcasting System (TBS), which includes the four aforementioned networks plus the Chinese Television System (CTS), was set up a little over two years ago. The logic in their first major public dialog with the legislature would not be contested in any mature democracy: Yes, political intervention is needed to establish a public media network, but political forces should not direct their day-to-day affairs or programming.
Only at the initial stage does a government need to exercise judgment in selecting a management team with impeccable qualifications. Thereafter it should hand over to those professionals full responsibility for running the organization.
There may be questions as to whether the PTS management team is the most competent possible, but there is also a greater and more urgent matter to which government officials and legislators should give serious attention — the draft Public Service Broadcasting and Television Act proposed by the CTS employees’ union.
Since the passage of the Public Television Service Act (公共電視法), public broadcasting has evolved from one channel — PTS — into five analog channels and a number of digital services, but changes in funding for these services now mean that the law no longer provides sufficient coverage or guidance.
Taiwan also has a number of government-run radio stations with many years’ standing. It is necessary to amend the law or introduce a new one to cover the role that these play and how they are managed.
During its eight years in power, the Democratic Progressive Party administration showed little concern for the matter. However, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government cannot just blame the previous regime for this state of affairs. Otherwise, the transfer of power will have been pointless, and politicians will lose the chance to activate and lead public opinion.
Taiwan’s media environment has been declining for many years. “Diversity” here amounts to interest groups seeking outlets for expression according to their commercial interests. All the more need, then, for public media to rectify the situation via moderation and balance.
Now that relations across the Taiwan Strait are growing closer, politicians should be doing all they can to ensure that Taiwan’s experience will be a positive model for China and Chinese everywhere.
Feng Chien-san is a professor in the Department of Journalism at National Chengchi University.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
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