Feiren over at Taiwan Matters explains why ESWN's presentation of the recent decision by DPP Chair Yu to ban communication between the DPP and the pro-Blue paper The China Times is hugely biased:Imagine for a moment if the New York Times falsely reported in a front page story that the chairman of the Republican Party had called anti-war protesters 'niggers' and that the paper then had reluctantly published a rinky-dink half apology inside the paper after the subject of the story had attempted for days to correct the story. You bet our hypothetical chairman would be furious. And that his organization wouldn't be granting (note the discretionary nature of the English word) any interviews to the Times. I'd also bet that the editor of any self-respecting paper who made an error like this would be fired. But no, Yu and the DPP are enemies of press freedom.
Read Feiren's whole piece -- readers should take note that Feiren is a longtime observer of the island's politics and culture.. Take a moment and read ESWN's presentations (here and here) and compare them to Feiren's. Note how ESWN's presentation lacks even the most basic context, such as pointing out that the China Times is a pro-Blue paper with a long history of distorting and lying about the democracy side, and that neither post bothers to explain to the reader the specific reason why Yu is upset! Feiren pointed out the same thing:
Far worse in my view though is ESWN's failure to explain why Yu is suing the paper and why he feels that the China Times can't be trusted to report responsibly on the DPP
As Maddog notes over at Taiwan Matters as well...
It isn't just a single "piece of shoddy [...] journalism" that is the problem. It's a long-running pattern that can be seen almost every day simply by reading the China Times' front page headlines and comparing them with reality. Why on earth would anyone willingly join in that unwinnable game? (Possible answers: They're fools or double agents.)
Anyone recall back in September when a China Times editor, writing in his blog, called for Shih Ming-te's red guards to become so radical that the US would signal the Taiwan military to intervene and overthrow the government? There's a serious problem with media ethics at the China Times that needs fixed. If boycotts are not the answer, would someone please suggest something will work to both highlight the Blue media's rampant biases, and get the problem fixed?
[Taiwan] [ESWN] [DPP] [media]
During the depose Chen campaign the China Times also ran an extreme 'guest editorial piece' pointing out that Shih Ming-teh had been willing to die for Taiwan in the past and should therefore go on a hunger strike in order to up the ante on forcing Chen out of office (what a bunch of wimps letting Shih do their suffering for them). I hated reading the editorial pieces in the China Times during that time. They sounded like a bunch of grim faced old Lien Chan clones with nothing original, analytical, or of any value to say - instead rattling off the same old allegations again and again as if they would become factual if repeated often enough.
ReplyDelete