Liberty Times (LT): The Want Want-CNS deal is a merger bid worth about NT$70 billion [US$2.22 billion] and has highlighted the controversies associated with cross-media mergers and acquisitions, and media monopolization. Your decisions to withdraw from the review of the case because of accusations made by the [Chinese-language] ‘China Times’ have been praised as much as criticized. How do you feel about this?
Chen Jeng-chang (陳正倉): Having withdrawn from the case, I am supposed to refrain from commenting on the matter, but since the proposed bill is still under procedural review and not substantive review, I feel the need to provide clarification on the many public statements and misconceptions [pertaining to the case.]
We were all puzzled when the China Times made its accusations. At the time, the Want Want Group intended to take over both China Television Co and CtiTV and its proposal was unanimously approved by all seven NCC members, who also agreed to set seven conditions — including having the two TV stations establish independent teams — for the group to meet. However, of the seven NCC members, we were the only three to be targeted by the China Times, which groundlessly accused us of “illegal abuse of power” and “malfeasance.”
Photo: Liu Hsin-de, Taipei Times
The takeover bid was approved with reservations based on the principles of opinion diversification and liberalization, and [because we believed that] mandating a news station and a business news station to found their own independent teams was a fairly reasonable request.
[Under normal circumstances,] operators who disagree [with administrative resolutions] are entitled to file an appeal, as allowed by the Administrative Appeal Act (行政訴願法), but the Want Want China Times Group chose to resort instead to using its media subsidiaries to pressure individual commissioners with lengthy critiques.
If we were to review the Want Want-CNS deal under such circumstances, [our] disapproval of the case could be misinterpreted as an act of retaliation, while an approval could also be seen as the result of succumbing to pressure. In this regard and driven by our desire to uphold the highest ethical standards, we resolved to withdraw from the case.
In order to ensure that the review could still be carried out properly by the remaining four NCC members, we closely studied the National Communications Commission Organic Law (國家通訊傳播委員會組織法) before opting to withdraw. [We found that] in practice, several past cases were actually reviewed and ratified by a group of four NCC members through closed-door meetings. Therefore, anyone concerned about the Want Want-CNS case could just look into those cases to gain a more thorough understanding.
Weng Hsiao-ling (翁曉玲): Our withdrawal from the Want Want-CNS case was undertaken after thorough deliberation and aimed at ensuring an environment whereby the remainign four commissioners could review the case beyond reproach. Unfortunately, the Want Want Group continued to accuse us of abusing our power and even mobilized legislators to criticize us and the commission as a whole.
Want Want Group chairman Tsai Eng-meng (蔡衍明) had said in a public hearing on the case that “his attendance was a fight to defend his dignity.” However, don’t the NCC commissioners need to defend theirs?
With regard to the false accusations by the Want Want Group’s media subsidiaries, I maintained that [we should] press charges both to safeguard the commission’s reputation and to restrain the media from employing public apparatus as a tool to defame administrative agencies.
However, that proposal was rejected by the NCC’s then--chairman, who not only blocked our attempts to issue a press release on the -matter, but also handled the issue as if it was of interest to only some NCC members. Only then did I realize “how small an NCC member was” and I regret that the commission was not willing to stand up and defend its own reputation.
LT: Following your withdrawal from the case, the public has voiced concerns that the remaining four NCC members may choose to wrap up the review as quickly as possible. How can NCC members still fulfill their duties if most of them withdraw from pending cases due to name-calling, and when those under review can force members to recuse themselves simply by public name calling?
Weng: The Want Want-CNS case has given rise to several controversies, ignited a media battle between the Want Want China Times Group’s subsidiaries, such as the China Times, CTiTV and the -[Chinese-language] Apple Daily, and highlighted the long-standing problem of media concentration.
However, such a form of targeted defamation may not happen again, since not all media can be as overweening and monopolize the market to the same extent.
Chung Chi-hui (鐘起惠): Many countries have long paid close attention to the issue of media concentration as exemplified by the Want Want-CNS deal, yet Taiwan has yet to properly regulate the issue.
The same applies to cross--media mergers, which we have investigated and researched at length since joining the NCC four years ago.
We have repeatedly called for a draft version of a Cross-Media Merger Act (跨媒體法) to deal with the matter, but [we have yet to see] the NCC declaring its stance on such a key media-related issue. In this regard, both the NCC chairman and the NCC’s administrative system should be held accountable in light of recent accusations from academics, who have said the commission has been derelict in the execution of its duties.
LT: Will the review of the Want Want-CNS deal be completed before the end of the current term [in which current NCC members are scheduled to step down at the end of next month]?
Chen: I presided over a proposed bill that involved the bid to acquire cable TV provider Kbro Co by Fubon Financial chairman Daniel Tsai (蔡明忠) through a separate company [he established] called Da-fu Media. Examination of the case lasted two years because it involved the political funds of the Taipei City Government, [one of the major shareholders in Fubon.]
Despite giving a green light to the acquisition, we set several pioneering conditions [for Da-fu Media] — such as requiring it to operate its channels in a fair and equitable manner and to submit a timetable for its promotion of digital convergence, which aimed to make up for the deficiencies of existing laws and bring about policy innovation.
The “Da-fu case” could actually serve as a good point of reference for the Want Want-CNS deal, because if media concentration is an issue of great concern to all sectors of society, the commission should make an attempt to lower [the level of its] media monopoly [as we did on the Da-fu case.] However, the other four NCC members have yet to resume their review of the [Want Want-CNS] case, which [we assume] could be the result of certain concerns, or even worse — because of “certain people.”
Chung: As the NCC is an independent government agency, its members should be more committed to their roles. The four NCC members should have put forth more explicit regulations and standards to handle problems relating to media monopolies and cross-media mergers, but instead they have delayed reviewing the case.
The same applies to the draft version of the Cross-Media Merger Act, which should have been promulgated long ago, but no progress has been made yet.
Translated by Stacy Hsu, staff writer
Part two of this interview will be published tomorrow.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫), spokeswoman Yang Chih-yu (楊智伃) and Legislator Hsieh Lung-chieh (謝龍介) would be summoned by police for questioning for leading an illegal assembly on Thursday evening last week, Minister of the Interior Liu Shyh-fang (劉世芳) said today. The three KMT officials led an assembly outside the Taipei City Prosecutors’ Office, a restricted area where public assembly is not allowed, protesting the questioning of several KMT staff and searches of KMT headquarters and offices in a recall petition forgery case. Chu, Yang and Hsieh are all suspected of contravening the Assembly and Parade Act (集會遊行法) by holding
PRAISE: Japanese visitor Takashi Kubota said the Taiwanese temple architecture images showcased in the AI Art Gallery were the most impressive displays he saw Taiwan does not have an official pavilion at the World Expo in Osaka, Japan, because of its diplomatic predicament, but the government-backed Tech World pavilion is drawing interest with its unique recreations of works by Taiwanese artists. The pavilion features an artificial intelligence (AI)-based art gallery showcasing works of famous Taiwanese artists from the Japanese colonial period using innovative technologies. Among its main simulated displays are Eastern gouache paintings by Chen Chin (陳進), Lin Yu-shan (林玉山) and Kuo Hsueh-hu (郭雪湖), who were the three young Taiwanese painters selected for the East Asian Painting exhibition in 1927. Gouache is a water-based
Taiwan would welcome the return of Honduras as a diplomatic ally if its next president decides to make such a move, Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) said yesterday. “Of course, we would welcome Honduras if they want to restore diplomatic ties with Taiwan after their elections,” Lin said at a meeting of the legislature’s Foreign Affairs and National Defense Committee, when asked to comment on statements made by two of the three Honduran presidential candidates during the presidential campaign in the Central American country. Taiwan is paying close attention to the region as a whole in the wake of a
OFF-TARGET: More than 30,000 participants were expected to take part in the Games next month, but only 6,550 foreign and 19,400 Taiwanese athletes have registered Taipei city councilors yesterday blasted the organizers of next month’s World Masters Games over sudden timetable and venue changes, which they said have caused thousands of participants to back out of the international sporting event, among other organizational issues. They also cited visa delays and political interference by China as reasons many foreign athletes are requesting refunds for the event, to be held from May 17 to 30. Jointly organized by the Taipei and New Taipei City governments, the games have been rocked by numerous controversies since preparations began in 2020. Taipei City Councilor Lin Yen-feng (林延鳳) said yesterday that new measures by