The blue and white political camps have been trying hard to gain power and to achieve their goals, they have used every means to attack the ruling party, including unwarranted smears and low-quality fake news.
Only by punishing such behavior with the judicial system can turbulence as a result of political conflict be avoided.
The use of political smears and fake news to attack political opponents has a long history. With the advent of social media — which means false reports can be generated cheaply and spread easily — their influence has become even more considerable.
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman and presidential candidate Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), without any evidence, accused President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) of profiteering from Medigen Vaccine Biologics Corp.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Wang Hung-wei (王鴻薇) accused J&V Energy Technology Co chairman Lai Chin-lin (賴勁麟), a former Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislator, of monopolizing Taiwan Power Co’s (Taipower) green energy projects.
KMT Taipei City Councilor Hsu Chiao-hsin (徐巧芯) spread rumors that imported eggs would cause cancer, causing panic.
Online commentator Lin Yu-hong (林裕紘), who is related to the Chang family — a political power in Yunlin County — and runs the “Lin Bay Hao You” (“Lin Bay 好油”) Facebook page, said that the imported eggs were mostly rotten because he had found that a few locally produced eggs had gone bad.
A KMT employee, Hsu Che-pin (許哲賓), was detained, accused of helping Lin fabricate death threats.
Disseminating smears on social media has become so serious that it has hindered the development of Taiwan’s industries.
Those who spread rumors do not have to pay a price. After Hsu Chiao-hsin’s rumor was debunked, she pretended nothing had happened and started another round. Unscrupulous politicians and faction leaders employed this strategy, which led to former Taipei Agricultural Products Marketing general manager Wu Yin-ning (吳音寧) and former minister of agriculture Chen Chi-chung (陳吉仲) losing their jobs.
Others can benefit by stockpiling goods, creating social panic and elevating prices to boost their profits.
If this chaos is to be stopped, wrongdoers must be punished and damages must be paid.
In the US judicial system, in addition to compensation, punitive damages are awarded by a court to punish defendants whose conduct is considered negligent or intentional. The purpose is to stop them from reusing the same tricks. The amount of the payment is usually considerable, hence it is an effective preventive measure.
When Lin fabricated a story that his family had received death threats, he was supported by former New Power Party (NPP) legislator Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), former National Taiwan University president Kuan Chung-ming (管中閔) and politicians from the blue and white camps. As the saying goes, “three men talking makes a tiger, and a rumor repeated enough becomes true.”
After they were found out, all they had to do was delete their social media posts and apologize. This has become standard operating procedure of the blue and white camps, and it can only be stopped by heavy penalties.
The Ministry of Transportation and Communications showed how to do it when dealing with Taiwan’s “pedestrian hell.” Many drivers have changed their behavior after the maximum fine for failing to yield to pedestrians was increased to NT$6,000. The threat of heavy fines can be effective and they must be applied when necessary.
Robert Wang is a writer.
Translated by Emma Liu
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS