|
Editorial: A day that
deserves some thought
Today is Journalists¡¦ Day in the Republic of China, though few know it and even
fewer will mark it as it commemorates the promulgation of the Protection of
Journalists and Public Opinion Organization Act in 1933, back when the Chinese
Nationalist Party (KMT) was running the other side of the Taiwan Strait.
However, there will be a march today to protest against media monopoly, inspired
by the controversy over Want Want China Times Group¡¦s planned acquisition of the
cable television services owned by China Network Systems. The march is being
organized by groups such as the Campaign for Media Reform and the Anti-Media
Monster Youth Alliance, who are not only outraged by the planned purchase and
the media monopoly that it would create, but also by the coverage given by the
Chinese-language China Times newspaper, the China Times Weekly magazine and the
CtiTV news channel of critics to the merger, especially Academia Sinica research
fellow Huang Kuo-chang (¶À°ê©÷).
The Want Want China Times Group was forced to issue an apology to Huang this
week after an investigation found he had not paid students to take part in a
protest against the proposed merger. However, it denied claims it fabricated the
story. Given the degree of venom directed at Huang over the past few weeks, that
grudging apology will probably cut little ice.
Huang was not the only one damaged by this controversy. Several senior editors
and reporters at China Times resigned or put in for early retirement because of
the newspaper¡¦s severe criticism of opponents of the merger, including a deputy
managing editor, deputy editorial page editor, international news center
director and two senior investigative reporters. Three members of CtiTV¡¦s ethics
committee also resigned.
At the end of last month, CtiTV spokesperson Huang Chun-ren (¶À«T¤¯) said its
coverage was not meant to tarnish anyone¡¦s reputation, but rather to make the
point that paid social movements should be scrutinized. The Want Want China
Times Group was also victimized by false rumors and it simply wanted to find out
the truth, Huang said.
It is a little hard to believe that the group places such a premium on the
truth, since its chairman Tsai Eng-meng (½²l©ú) told a public hearing earlier this
year that he saw nothing wrong with getting paid by the Chinese government to
write news for it for publication here. The idea that social movements, paid or
otherwise, deserve special scrutiny also smacks of China¡¦s authoritarianism and
censorship.
More importantly, given that the law bars political parties, the government and
the military from influencing the media, why can a similar stance not be taken
against China? There has been enough slippage in media standards in recent
years. We don¡¦t need to copy methods from across the Strait.
A Gallup poll earlier this year found that as many as 86 percent of Taiwanese
respondents said the news media enjoyed considerable freedom, with only 9
percent feeling otherwise. That ¡§yes¡¨ ratio was the highest among all Asian
countries and areas covered in the study and the 17th-highest globally. However,
the latest freedom of the press ranking released by Freedom House in May this
year ranked Taiwan 47th in the world, one place higher than last year, but down
since 2008, when the Democratic Progressive Party was in power and Taiwan was
ranked 32nd.
The truth is that Taiwan¡¦s fourth estate is under threat from efforts to control
it by conglomerates such as Want Want, by politicians and by China, but it is
also under threat from a lack of adherence to professional standards, and a
willingness to report first and fact-check later. The feeding frenzies and media
packs that surround headline makers or even peripheral players can be
off-putting, both to their victims and to viewers and readers. Yet any attempt
to rein in the more cowboy antics draws cries of press censorship.
A trustworthy, reliable media is crucial to Taiwan¡¦s democracy. That is worth
remembering on Journalists¡¦ Day.
|
