Taiwan is already famous
The justification for Kaohsiung hosting the 2009 World Games was that it would “raise the international profile” of Taiwan and of the city of Kaohsiung.
I have no doubt that this claim would fit well with those Taiwanese who labor under the delusion that their country is largely unknown outside the Pacific Rim.
Yet the claim that the 2009 World Games would “raise the international profile” of Taiwan is disingenuous.
Taiwan is known to vast numbers of people around the world who have any connection to the global consumer electronics industry. If anything, Taiwan would make the World Games world famous — not the other way around!
A simple Google search for “TV contracts World Games” returned a first page of 10 results linking to baseball, superbikes and soccer. No mention of the World Games. No mention of Taiwan. No mention of Kaohsiung.
A Google search for “TV audience World Games” returned one result linking to a piece in the Hong Kong edition of the China Daily in which the reader learns that there are “growing numbers of television channels offering coverage of the games,” according to one Games official. Yet no estimates are given for international TV audiences nor are any details of TV contracts given.
One possible implication is that these figures are so small that they are dwarfed by the number of ticket sales, which we learn are about 200,000, and the domestic TV audience for the opening ceremony, which reportedly drew 5 million viewers in a country of 23 million people.
The other Google results for “TV audience World Games” link to rugby, soccer, badminton and chess competitions.
Although I have no complaint against athletes participating in their chosen sports or against people paying to watch them, I do object to the fact that it was even partially tax-payer funded (Chinese Nationalist Party shenanigans notwithstanding), and to the outrageous claim that the World Games would raise Taiwan’s international profile.
That this claim is false cannot be denied by anyone, regardless of their political affiliation.
It is to your shame as “professional journalists” that your publication ignores this obviously uncomfortable fact.
In expectation of being ignored,
Yours.
MICHAEL FAGAN
Tainan
Pat Gelsinger took the reins as Intel CEO three years ago with hopes of reviving the US industrial icon. He soon made a big mistake. Intel had a sweet deal going with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), the giant manufacturer of semiconductors for other companies. TSMC would make chips that Intel designed, but could not produce and was offering deep discounts to Intel, four people with knowledge of the agreement said. Instead of nurturing the relationship, Gelsinger — who hoped to restore Intel’s own manufacturing prowess — offended TSMC by calling out Taiwan’s precarious relations with China. “You don’t want all of
A chip made by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) was found on a Huawei Technologies Co artificial intelligence (AI) processor, indicating a possible breach of US export restrictions that have been in place since 2019 on sensitive tech to the Chinese firm and others. The incident has triggered significant concern in the IT industry, as it appears that proxy buyers are acting on behalf of restricted Chinese companies to bypass the US rules, which are intended to protect its national security. Canada-based research firm TechInsights conducted a die analysis of the Huawei Ascend 910B AI Trainer, releasing its findings on Oct.
In honor of President Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday, my longtime friend and colleague John Tkacik wrote an excellent op-ed reassessing Carter’s derecognition of Taipei. But I would like to add my own thoughts on this often-misunderstood president. During Carter’s single term as president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, despite numerous foreign policy and domestic challenges, he is widely recognized for brokering the historic 1978 Camp David Accords that ended the state of war between Egypt and Israel after more than three decades of hostilities. It is considered one of the most significant diplomatic achievements of the 20th century.
As the war in Burma stretches into its 76th year, China continues to play both sides. Beijing backs the junta, which seized power in the 2021 coup, while also funding some of the resistance groups fighting the regime. Some suggest that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is hedging his bets, positioning China to side with the victors regardless of the outcome. However, a more accurate explanation is that China is acting pragmatically to safeguard its investments and ensure the steady flow of natural resources and energy for its economy. China’s primary interest is stability and supporting the junta initially seemed like the best
RSS