There is nothing new in the view that the country’s pro-unification media are less than truthful in their reporting, so why did the China Times catch so much flak recently?
On Jan. 20, the Washington Post, one of the most important newspapers in the US, followed up on Taiwan’s presidential election with an interview with Want Want Group chairman Tsai Eng-meng (蔡衍明) in which Tsai gave his views on cross-strait unification, called China democratic, said that what happened at Tiananmen Square in Beijing on June 4, 1989, wasn’t really a massacre and added that he could not wait for unification to take place.
He also admitted that he had fired the editor of the China Times because he “hurt me by offending people, not just mainlanders. On lots of things, people were offended.” The editor had called Chen Yunlin (陳雲林), the chairman of China’s Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits, a “third-rate” politician. In addition, Tsai said that reporters were free to criticize, but that they “need to think carefully before they write.”
Many think that the China Times is heavily biased, but the paper is allowed to continue in its ways thanks to the freedom of expression and of the market.
However, many academics felt that Tsai’s use of his big media empire this time to whitewash the Chinese regime’s suppression of democracy and human rights and distortion of facts in an attempt to denigrate Taiwan’s democracy and freedom has made an active and collective protest necessary.
A lot of people might worry that Taiwan’s freedom of the press is being undermined and that Taiwanese media outlets are being used to oppose democracy and freedom. Now Tsai wants to buy China Network Systems’ cable TV network, which will affect 23 percent of viewers in Taiwan.
The recent presidential election made it clear that many facts are being distorted in order to use talk of democracy and freedom as an excuse to destroy that very democracy and freedom. It is abundantly clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is using China-based Taiwanese businesspeople to force political talks with Taiwan.
Those wealthy pro-CCP Taiwanese businesspeople are not really President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) friends or fans; they only love themselves, and what they want is the wealth the Chinese market has to offer. Some people are trying to find excuses for them by saying that businesspeople have no nation.
One can be sure that these people do not travel on a Republic of China passport only: With their wealth, they can buy themselves an “investor’s passport” in any country of their choosing.
However, normal people have to have a home country. There are at least 6.09 million Taiwanese voters who can begin by taking action for themselves — they can refuse to read the China Times, refuse to buy inferior Chinese goods and food products, and refuse to buy the products of pro-CCP companies.
Not only will that protect their own security, it will also help build Taiwanese awareness. Only by building and insisting on Taiwanese values can Taiwanese be free from fear.
Chang Yen-hsian is president of the Taiwan Association of University Professors.
Translated by Perry Svensson
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