There were three major factors at play in the Jan. 14 presidential and legislative elections — these did real damage to the success story of Taiwanese democracy and demonstrated that we still have some way to go before the country can be considered a normal democratic nation.
These factors were negative propaganda and misinformation, the glaring disparity in resources available to the parties, and overseas interference. In talking of overseas interference, this refers specifically to that, either direct or indirect, of China and the US.
The disparity in resources refers to the vast wealth of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), and the access it had to the state apparatus and government resources. Perhaps the most shameful aspect, however, is the stubborn stain of vote-buying and the willingness of some to trade their electoral say for monetary gain.
For the negative propaganda and misinformation, blame the various media outlets prepared to put their own political beliefs and profit before professional integrity, more so perhaps than ever before.
One expects politicians to resort to negative campaigning — it is in their blood; they will not change. However, the press, supposedly an impartial observer, should not stoop to character assassination.
Certain elements within the media went beyond simply dancing to the KMT’s tune, by calling for the blood of People First Party (PFP) candidate James Soong (宋楚瑜) and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文). One editorial in the Chinese-language United Daily News went as far as to claim that Soong supported Tsai. Not only did such a statement betray the writer’s own political hysteria and lack of journalistic integrity, it might even have been illegal.
In the past the media have been accused of unfair and factually unsound reporting, political favoritism, inaccurate opinion polls and inflated vote counts. This time round, they were also quite happy to accept “infomercials” and other propaganda on behalf of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and the KMT.
Such latitude derives surely from ideological affiliation and an anti-independence stance on the part of the press. That, and the abandonment of a commitment to being the “perpetual opposition” — one of the basic roles the press should fulfil as the fourth estate — as well as a long-standing relationship with KMT governments.
The media’s preoccupation with profit and their ideological stance made it easier for China to interfere in the presidential election.
During previous presidential elections in Taiwan, China has employed both verbal and military intimidation, relying on missiles fired over the Taiwan Strait on the orders of the Chinese president, and on the Chinese premier and other senior officials making personal appearances and giving inflammatory speeches.
Now all they need to do is make pronouncements through the Taiwan Affairs Office and someone in Taiwan will press the message home, aided and abetted by a media scornful of a Taiwan-centric perspective. No longer do senior Chinese figures actually have to make personal appearances, and the effect of the intimidation is that much greater as a result.
The KMT and the Chinese Communist Party finally got the upper hand in the battle for public opinion played out in the press over the so-called “1992 consensus.”
Should the media continue down this slippery slope, the country will never be able to develop into a normal democratic society.
Lu Shih-hsiang is an adviser to the Taipei Times.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
After the coup in Burma in 2021, the country’s decades-long armed conflict escalated into a full-scale war. On one side was the Burmese army; large, well-equipped, and funded by China, supported with weapons, including airplanes and helicopters from China and Russia. On the other side were the pro-democracy forces, composed of countless small ethnic resistance armies. The military junta cut off electricity, phone and cell service, and the Internet in most of the country, leaving resistance forces isolated from the outside world and making it difficult for the various armies to coordinate with one another. Despite being severely outnumbered and
RSS