Ask anyone their opinion of Taiwanese media and you would get answers of all kinds — from interesting, dynamic and competitive to brain-dead, unprofessional and lacking in global perspective.
The truth may lie somewhere in between, but the discussion of Taiwanese media and its challenges would have to include growing Chinese influence and the local industry’s struggle between commercial success and core journalistic values.
A recent incident in Hong Kong and a column on Taiwan’s media provided a good opportunity to examine what Taiwan’s media is all about.
Kevin Lau (劉進圖), former editor-in-chief of Hong Kong’s Ming Pao, was allegedly stabbed six times by two men on Wednesday last week when he got out of his car. He is now in stable condition after multiple operations.
Known for his strong criticism of the Hong Kong government, Lau was reassigned to another position in January. Observers were suspicious that the reassignment and the attack were both politically motivated, as China is reportedly seeking tighter control over the territory’s media.
The case was not the first time that a member of Hong Kong’s media has been attacked in recent years. Neither was it the first time Beijing had reportedly interfered with personnel changes in a media organization. China has used its influence and had advertisers withdraw their advertisements from media outlets that criticized Beijing and Hong Kong authorities.
While there has been no reported attacks on media members in Taiwan, Lau’s case could strike fear into local media circles at a time of growing Chinese influence on various sectors — media included.
So far Beijing’s influence on Taiwan’s media has been limited to the financial side, as several media organizations either have business ties to China or aim to develop such relationships. Self-censorship has become common among these outlets, with their complete disregard of human rights issues in China: Falun Gong, Xinjiang and Tibet, among others.
No one knows whether there will be another Lau in Taiwan if this nation continues its pro-China stance under President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration.
Meanwhile, an article published by Foreign Policy magazine’s Web site recently raised eyebrows. The article, titled “Freedom, Fried,” discussed the status of Taiwanese media and has been translated by many outlets and circulated on social media.
The author described Taiwan’s freewheeling media as salacious and superficial, focusing only on inward-looking, sensational and mundane reporting. Journalism has been so bad that antipathy among consumers leads them to find other news sources, he wrote.
The reasons the author ignored the “China factor” in the recent development of Taiwan media is unknown. Also intriguing is that the column quoted several employees from the pro-China Want Want China Times Group who sang the praises of Chinese media’s “sense of history and worldly perspective” without mentioning Beijing’s censorship.
Yet the condition the author writes of is common knowledge. Most journalists know when they produce another “junk food” piece.
Media insiders describe this as a vicious cycle: Sensational reporting generates higher readership and ratings and Taiwanese tend to pay little attention to international news, so media outlets keep feeding the public the news they like, rather than the news they are supposed to know about.
At the end of the day, either the media or the audience will have to take initiative and make a change that will facilitate a positive and virtuous cycle.
Facing a double challenge — from China and from within — Taiwanese media can be expected to see more hardship on the way to a new age. Local journalism has managed to do the unthinkable before — breaking the decades-long restriction of the authoritarian regime. Now it must happen again.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS