In a democratic society, the media are referred to as the fourth estate, or the fourth power, separate from the government. The media are expected to frame political issues in relation to public interests.
However, there is another kind of media figure, one that enjoys reprimanding others while refusing to be corrected, criticizing others while denying all criticism against them.
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has recruited Broadcasting Corp of China (BCC) chairman Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康) as its vice presidential candidate. Whether he resigns from the company is a public matter.
His resignation has everything to do with the rights of viewers and fairness for next month’s election.
Everyone needs to ask Jaw: When will you resign from BCC?
Jaw has cited the Radio and Television Act (廣播電視法) as saying that political party workers cannot be supervisors of a radio or television business, but he has applied for leave from his roles as BCC chairman and general manager, so there should not be a problem.
He also said that if there are loopholes in the law, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) should close them.
His comments might sound reasonable to some, but they are absurd on close examination.
The purpose of the act is to keep politicians and media figures independent from each other. Article 1 clearly states that the act was created to “promote the healthy development of radio/television businesses, ensure media professionalism and independence, protect the audiovisual rights and interests of the public, enhance public benefits, interests and welfare, and maintain the audiovisual diversity.”
Although the law does not say anything about political candidates needing to resign from a media corporation, this is a loophole that should be fixed by legislators rather than a political party.
The Public Officials Election and Recall Act (公職人員選舉罷免法) is a guide to the spirit of the radio and TV act. It says that commissioners, supervisors and staff of election commissions should resign if they become a political candidate to keep elections just and fair.
Even though Jaw has taken leave to contest the election, his identity remains in the media. He could immediately return to BCC after Jan. 13.
How can he remain impartial on matters involving the company? How can he ensure that he would not use his public office for private gain?
Election officials are required to be impartial and so are media managers given that the media is capable of influencing voters.
This is not merely a legal issue — it is an ethical and moral issue concerning the press and news media.
The law is the minimum moral standard.
Jaw said that he abides by the law and taking leave was more than he had to do.
However, as a vice presidential candidate, his behavior should set a standard for society to follow. If he resigns, nobody would be able to question him over his BCC post.
Moreover, it would help keep the election impartial and protect media ethics.
DPP legislator-at-large candidate Puma Shen (沈伯洋) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) legislator-at-large candidate Hsu Jui-hsi (徐瑞希) have resigned from their media-related positions. The National Communications Commission should demand an explanation from Jaw for his failure to do so.
As a significant media figure and a vice presidential candidate, how can he ensure that the company he presides over maintains independence and impartiality during the election?
Chuang Sheng-rong is a lawyer.
Translated by Emma Liu
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS