The press in the Republic of China has developed rapidly in the last decade as a result of spectacular economic growth and a liberal government policy toward freedom of the press even under wartime conditions. Just recently, the emotion-packed case between Legislator Chen Chi-ying and the Independence Evening Post provided another mile-tone in the quest of a free and responsible press.
The Press Council of Taipei, organized by the local newspapers but vested with the power of making independent judgments in controversial cases involving news media, exercised for the first time its authority to censure a newspaper for coverage that touched on the good name of an individual. After exhaustive study, the Council brought in a clear-cut verdict against the Independence Evening Post. All newspapers in Taipei, including the paper in question, printed the finding of the Council as a symbol of support of this self-disciplinary measure. This is a unique episode in the development of the Republic of China's free press.
The significance lies in the fact that hitherto the newspapers of this country have been preoccupied with maintaining freedom of the press in a time of war. They have fought vigorously for the right to expose the dark side of society. They reasoned vigorously with the government that exposure of ugly realities, while not always consistent with the government policy of publicizing the country's good side, actually would spur reforms and ultimately contribute to the war effort The liberal policy of the Chinese government has stimulated the rapid growth of newspaper enterprises in the last decade. Visitors from Hongkong and Japan have expressed surprise at the degree of press freedom in Taiwan, which has avoided wartime censorship.
But the enterprising spirit of local newspapers, together with the lack of a strict law, has sometimes resulted in abuses in reporting news of personalities and human relations. This was pointed out three years ago by a Hongkong newspaper leader attending a forum in Taipei. He instantly became the target of broadsides from an angry press when he was bold enough to say that newspapers in Taiwan had too much freedom to report crime stories and attack individuals.
First Case
The press in this country is highly sensitive, because its freedom has been won over a period of years. There is fear that any action of government might curtail this liberty. In the last few years, however, the Taiwan press has matured, and with a foundation firmly laid, has had second thoughts about the problem. Three other factors have contributed to willingness to change. First is the widespread public complaint that sensationalized reporting of crime and sex poisons the minds of the younger generation. Second, foreign journalism teachers visiting Taiwan on lecture tours have emphasized the social responsibility of a free press. Finally, the Chinese Communists have been conducting a subtle campaign to undermine free China's image abroad by systematic distortion of news stories and pictures from Taipei.
Thus a movement of self-discipline was born with establishment of the Press Council, made up of press leaders and legal experts. The first case to come before the Council was the sensational dispute between Chen Chi-yin and the Independence Evening Post. Chen, a writer and legislator, married Miss Wang Sui-ying, a lady he had known 20 years before, on March 18, 1964. The wedding ceremony was kept secret from the public and was attended only by some 20 friends and relatives.
The bride was a divorcee. She had been married to a Professor Wu in 1944. They were divorced March 19, 1963, a year before her marriage to Chen.
Newspapers quickly learned of the remarriage and covered it in detail. On April 17, 1964, Chen appealed to the Press Council, asking corrective action against the Independence Evening Post for "incorrect and libelous" reports and cartoons which had "seriously damaged my reputation and career."
Subheads Rapped
The Press Council was established September 2, 1963, by the Taipei Newspaper Publishers' Association, to carry out a program of self-discipline in reporting and editorializing. Prominent legal and journalistic personalities were invited to become members. Although the Council is supported by the Publishers' Association, its findings are entirely independent and are referred to TNPA for deliberation and action.
Legislator Chen charged that the Independence Evening Post had on March 18, 19, 21, and 23 reported falsely on his marriage and published cartoons damaging to his reputation. He said the paper's statement that he and Miss Wang had been sweethearts for 20 years was untrue. He strongly denied that he had deliberately wrecked Miss Wang's marriage in order to marry her himself.
On March 21 a Post subhead said:
"After the demon enters Eden, a happy couple faces sad departure." Another headline said: "After Chen rattled his sword, the family of Professor Wu was wrecked." Chen charged malicious subheads went far beyond the content of the story.
Chen has been a leader in a movement for decency in literature. He once denounced a prominent woman novelist for writing too frankly of sex. In a cartoon caption, the Post said that "while the lady writer wrote sex novels, she said it without doing it. But you (Chen) are practicing it without openly saying it. If you can discipline only other persons but not yourself, then you should expel yourself from the Chinese Literary Association." Miss Ku Liang-hui, the woman author, was expelled from the Association. Chen played a role in the expulsion.
Chen said the conduct of the Post had defamed not merely one individual, but had shamed the entire newspaper profession.
Three Points
The Press Council convened several meetings and heard explanations from the publisher and managing editor of the Independence Evening Post. The decision was handed down June 9.
Three main points were made by the Council. First, it held that accuracy is the first requirement of reporting. Any mistake, whether the result of deliberate exaggeration or of carelessness, is not to be excused. The Council refused to accept the explanation of the managing editor that reporters tried to reach Legislator Chen three times but without success.
Second, the Council said it was highly improper for the paper to use headlines that went beyond the representations of the story.
Third, the Council said the cartoons were without sufficient factual foundation and showed poor judgment.
Council findings went to the Publishers' Association, which has the authority to require a statement of correction. Meanwhile, Taipei newspapers had published the findings of the Press Council. The Post was among them—but on the same page, expressed its own opinion on the case. The Post said it had been misunderstood, and forwarded its explanation to the Publishers' Association. The Association finally decided to support the findings of the Press Council, but not to ask the Post to publish a statement of correction.
Gain in Prestige
On August 8 Legislator Chen appealed to the Press Council to ask the Post to publish a correction. This request was forwarded to the Publishers' Association but no action was taken. Chen did not press again and the case was closed.
The Press Council gained greatly in prestige as a result of its fair and careful handling of the case. The decision was unanimous. A council officer said the episode showed how self-discipline can have a restraining influence on newspapers. Criticism from other newspapers is more acceptable to the press than corrective action by the government, he said. There is an implication that the press can be both free and responsible without government interference.
A follow-up case illustrates the Press Council's quickly developing effectiveness. In the winter of 1964, Li Tsai-fa, a former underworld leader in Hongkong, killed one of his former friends, who later was identified as a professional gambler. Some Taipei newspapers played up the story and insinuated that the victim was a crook and a homosexual. The man's widow, living in Hongkong, protested to the Press Council, which urged moderation. Newspapers followed this counsel and libelous reporting ended.
Consciousness of responsibility is partly a by-product of Taiwan's economic development. The size of newspapers and their quality have grown with prosperity. The small, crudely equipped newspapers of a decade ago have become metropolitan dailies whose circulation and advertisements compare with those of Hongkong and other Asian cities.
Leading dailies have average monthly advertising revenue of more than NT$2,000,000 (US$50,000). A couple of papers are nearing the NT$3,000,000 mark. Publishers say that when restriction on the number of pages is lifted, advertising revenue will soar even higher.
Newspapers have been transformed from poorly managed and often losing propositions into a modern, efficient industry. Government has helped by permitting a high degree of freedom despite the war against the Chinese Communists. Newspapers publish all the news, even that unfavorable to the government, within the limits of national security. The guiding principle of government is that an informed public is a strong and loyal one.
Quick Reforms
As circulation grew, so did crime news and other sensationalized articles, much as in England and the United States during the 19th century. Reform, however, seems to be developing more quickly than in many foreign countries. Yellow journalism and extreme personal comment already are frowned upon. The Press Council's existence will make even unprincipled editors think twice before engaging in exaggeration or defamation.
Government not only has tried to avoid interference with the press, but has acted positively to take reporters and editors into its confidence with regard to important matters. Background briefings are given writers and editors of newspapers, radio, and television. Officials speak off the record with complete frankness. Seminars also have been conducted by government, one on military and one on general news.
With the growing maturity of the press, the self-disciplinary movement is expected to gain strength and standing. The Press Council has already proved it can move into a controversial situation to prevent newspaper abuse and obviate the necessity for government interference. If libel can be prevented, that's better than the best of libel laws.