Ever since coming into office, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has kept pushing energy conservation, carbon emission reduction and environmental conservation policies. At a conference on policies for combating climate change he presided over in May last year, Ma encouraged people to try harder to conserve energy and reduce carbon emissions and he also announced that the government would be investing in developing the green energy technology industry. It is therefore hard to understand why on Jan. 28, just one day after the proposal for the green energy technology industry was being assessed, a news report appeared in the Chinese-language United Evening News saying the Industrial Development Bureau was promoting and advertising the Kuokuang Petrochemical development project.
It is hard to understand why the government on the one hand would encourage the public to conserve energy and cut down on carbon emissions, while on the other hand developing the petrochemical industry, which emits a lot of carbon. If we look at the information compiled by Taiwan Media Watch about the Environmental Protection Administration’s (EPA) main procurements, we see that the government is focusing its environmental protection education promotions on informing people about the environment and being greener, conserving energy and cutting down on carbon emissions. This promotion includes hosting a variety of events, while also purchasing news coverage and printing magazines and dedicated publications.
Based on a conservative estimate, the EPA’s overall costs for education on environmental protection and the promotion of conserving energy and cutting down carbon emissions totaled almost NT$84 million (US$2.8 million) last year. Of this, about NT$9.23 million was spent on the promotion of policies and decrees by purchasing news coverage and holding symposiums (for further details, refer to the following Web site: www.mediawatch.org.tw/sites/default/files/doc.pdf). On closer analysis, we discovered that only three of 16 promotional projects conducted by the EPA last year were aimed at educating people about saving energy and cutting down emissions. However, the implementation and promotion of these three projects accounted for NT$56.9 million, more than half the overall cost.
The largest category of promotional projects, the one aimed at environmental protection education, consisted of five projects and the EPA spent NT$1.7 million on advertising these five projects, including the purchasing of news coverage. In addition, there were two cases in which the EPA seems to have purchased news and embedded marketing by directly asking domestic publishing companies to hold forums and using magazine promotion. If we then include the NT$6 million spent on dedicated TV news reports and the production and airing of news flashes, we see that last year, the EPA spent almost NT$10 million on advertising and promotion, including the organization of events, recording and distributing DVDs and buying news for embedded marketing.
The EPA, of course, was not alone. The bureau also spent about NT$900,000, including embedded marketing in news, on promoting eco-friendly industries. If we view educating the public about environmental protection as a cross-departmental policy and add the sums spent by the EPA and the bureau together, the government spent NT$10.23 million last year on advertisements for environmental protection education. It also tells us that these advertising fees included embedded marketing by buying news coverage. Thus, while the government was telling everyone to conserve energy, reduce carbon emissions and lead more environmentally friendly lifestyles, they not only spent almost NT$100 million on policy implementation, the EPA and the bureau also spent almost NT$10.23 million on events, advertising and purchasing news coverage.
However, statistics show that after the Kuokuang Petrochemical project is completed, yearly carbon emissions will increase by anywhere from 10 million to 40 million tonnes. However, the government does not take the severe damage this project will have on Taiwan’s environment and ecology seriously.
Even more perplexing, the government has spent great amounts of money on purchasing news coverage to promote energy conservation and carbon emission reductions, while the bureau still provides support and assistance in promoting the Kuokuang Petrochemical project.
Actions like these not only deceive the public, they are also contradictory and make it hard for us to believe in the government’s determination to implement policies for energy conservation, carbon emission reductions and sustainable and environmentally friendly development.
We believe the government should implement energy conservation, carbon emission reduction and environmental protection ideals. The Kuokuang Petrochemical project may be in its fourth round of assessments, but we think the government should abandon the project. This is the only way spending NT$100 million on environmental promotion and advertising complements implementation of the government’s ideals.
In addition, in the spirit of open disclosure of government information, we believe the government should take the initiative in revealing how much money they have spent on past promotions and how many projects they have funded. At the same time, the EPA and the bureau should implement the recently amended Budget Act (預算法) and stop engaging in embedded marketing by buying news coverage. We hope that with the start of a new lunar year, the EPA can stop breaking the law and stop engaging in purchasing news coverage for embedded marketing.
Kuan Chung-hsiang is chairman of Taiwan Media Watch and Li Zi-wei is the executive secretary of Taiwan Media Watch.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
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