The DPP Denounces the Media but Shirks Its Responsibility

The DPP Denounces the Media but Shirks Its Responsibility
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
June 24, 2009

The DPP has made a habit of stepping in the blood of the media to reach its goal. This is not news. Years ago the DPP, motivated by of selfish political interest, ripped up newspapers and threatened boycotts. After eight years in power, the DPP regime has left behind a sorrry record of raids against the media, lawsuits against the media, and naked coercion against the media. It resorted to every means at its disposal. This old dog has now run out of tricks. Most disappointing of all, the person who pointed the finger at the media today was none other than Party Chairman Tsai Ing-wen, long assumed to be a moderate centrist. She shirked her duty as leader of the opposition.

Tsai Ing-wen accused the China Times of failing to criticize the Ma administration's policies, while deliberately exaggerating power struggles between the DPP Chairman and DPP leaders. She denied coming to Chen Shui-bian's aid only in order to cling the Party Chairmanship. She accused the China Times of attempting to provoke internecine conflict, and of attempting to undermine the image of the party.

We cannot understand why Chairman Tsai made such allegations. Is the election of the chairman of the DPP a subject that the media is not permitted to report and comment on? Did Chairman Tsai read the China Times? If she did, she knows perfectly well the China Times never said the DPP signature drive was launched in order to consolidate Tsai's position as party chairman. Why did she think it was? Could it be she has deep feelings of insecurity? Could it be she harbors an inordinate hosility towards the China Times? We do not wish to speculate. We merely wish to remind Chairman Tsai that the Chairmanship of the DPP has always been a focus of media attention. It makes no difference whether the DPP is power or in the opposition. Years ago, when other media dared not speak on behalf of the Democratic Progressive Party, the China Times held a debate on the Democratic Progressive Party Chairman election. It did so for a simple reason. Taiwan needs a healthy opposition party.

Unfortunately, the Democratic Progressive Party, after eight years in power, is attempting to block media coverage of the Democratic Progressive Party chairman election. Even more unfortunately, the person attempting to muzzle the media is someone who was once Vice President of the Executive Yuan.

Chairman Tsai cannot deny the existence of the Democratic Progressive Party signature drive. The China Times has never evaded the media's responsibility to offer forthright criticisms. Ever since the Chen corruption case exploded, we have been consistent. We expect the DPP to live up to its reputation as a native political party committed to clean government. We want the Democratic Progressive Party to have a clear understanding of the Chen corruption case. We are criticizing the Democratic Progressive Party for failing to emerge from Chen Shui-bian's shadow. We have warned DPP leaders not to sacrifice the DPP in order to shield Chen Shui-bian from prosecution. They must not bury the hopes the public have for a native political party.

After all, the Democratic Progressive Party is supposed to be an asset to Taiwan. It is not supposed to be an asset to Chen Shui-bian. It is not supposed to be an asset to this or that local party boss. We would like to ask Chairman Tsai a question. Just because the China Times holds different views than Tsai on how to save the DPP, is it really necessary to villify the China Times so disproportionately?

Various and sundry Democratic Progressive Party "princes" are fighting over the party chairmanship. Should the media ignore this? If no one expectated anything from the Democratic Progressive Party, if it was dispensable, then no one would bother running for party chairman. After eight years in power, the Democratic Progressive Party is again in the opposition. But the Green Camp "princes" have thrown their hats in the ring. For the DPP this ought to be a gratifying development. Or does Chairman Tsai expect the DPP to give its overwhelming support to Tsai Ing-wen, the way the Kuomintang gave its support to Ma Ying-jeou?

The China Times is a media organization. It has high expectations of the DPP. That is why its criticisms are so severe. It could ignore the struggle among Green Camp "princes" for the DPP party chairmanship, as well as Chairman Tsai's fierce and irrational remarks. We have no desire to engage in wild speculation. But before Chairman Tsai criticizes us, shouldn't she ask herself whether anyone else in the Democratic Progressive Party wants to run for party chairman? Does Chairman Tsai intend to seek a second term? Is she hoping the other "princes" will bow out? No matter what the truth might be, as a member of the media, are we supposed to refrain from reporting and commenting?

Tsai Ing-wen became an official during the KMT era. She was former President Lee Teng-hui's chief of staff. Her experience and professionalism have distinguished her from past politicians. Because of her professionalism and her restrained and precise manner of speech, both Blue and Green Camp leaders and officials find it difficult to speak ill of her. She should not be a populist rabble-rouser. She should not attempt to mobilze Deep Green Taiwan independence zealots. She should pay close attention to her political methods. She should persuade centrist voters to lean toward the Democratic Progressive Party. Following the 2008 presidential election, the Democratic Progressive Party "princes" stepped down. This allowed her to take over the unfamiliar duties of party leader under calm conditions. Why did they do so, if not because they hoped she would lead the Democratic Progressive Party down a different path? Alas, Tsai Ing-wen has backed off.

Does Tsai Ing-wen intend to seek a second term as DPP Chairman? The Democratic Progressive Party "princes" are fighting over the party chairmanship. These are matters of public interest. Is the China Times wrong to report on the heated party chairmanship election?

Tsai Ing-wen accused the China Times of failing to criticize the Ma administration's policies. She was dead wrong. First, the China Times has never pulled its punches when criticizing the ruling administration. The China Times is keeping a close eye on the one man KMT chairmanship election. Secondly, to paraphrase Green Camp "prince" and former Premier Su Tseng-chang: Criticizing the KMT will not restore the DPP to power. Criticizing the media will not absolve the opposition party of its responsibilities.

中時電子報 新聞
中國時報 　2009.06.24
社論－光靠罵媒體 卸不了在野黨責任
本報訊

民進黨踩著媒體鮮血前進從不是新聞。當年，民進黨人可以為一己政治之需求，公開撕報紙、揚言退報；執政八年，民進黨政府締造的歷史，從搜索媒體、控告媒體，到新聞施壓，無所不用其極，如今再玩不出新把戲，令人遺憾的是，竟是由社會形象溫和中庸的黨主席蔡英文出場，無的放矢地指責媒體，藉以逃避她作為唯一反對黨領袖的責任。

蔡英文指責《中國時報》對馬政府的政策沒有批判，卻刻意炒作報導民進黨主席選舉和黨內生態，指稱聲援陳水扁是為了黨主席保衛戰，藉此製造該黨黨內紛爭，損害民進黨形象。

我們不理解蔡主席為何會做出此一指控？民進黨主席選舉難道不是可受報導與公評之事？蔡主席如果有仔細讀過《中國時報》，應該清楚中時沒有隻字片語提及民進黨連署救扁是為了黨主席保衛戰，她的聯想，究竟是因為自己強烈的不安全感？還是對《中國時報》不公平的敵意？我們並不想揣測，只是必須非常持平地告訴蔡主席：民進黨主席從來都是媒體關切的焦點，不論民進黨執政或在野。當年，在其他媒體不敢為民進黨言的時候，《中國時報》甚至舉辦過民進黨主席選舉辯論，為的只是一個非常單純的理想：台灣需要一個健全的反對黨。

很遺憾，民進黨執政八年之後，竟然企圖阻絕媒體對民進黨主席選舉的報導，我們更遺憾，扮演這個打壓媒體角色的人，竟是曾經擔任過行政院副院長這麼高層職務之人！

蔡主席不能否認，民進黨連署聲援救扁是事實，《中國時報》從來沒有迴避媒體提出諍言的責任，從扁案爆發迄今，我們始終一以貫之，站在期許民進黨勿忘本土政黨標榜清廉初衷的立場，提醒民進黨認清扁弊案之本質、批判民進黨揮棄不了扁陰影的猶豫，甚至從不迴避地預警不能為了扁弊案埋葬民進黨、埋葬台灣對本土政黨的深沉期待。

畢竟，民進黨該是台灣人的資產，不該是陳水扁，也不該是哪個派系天王的資產吧！請問蔡主席：《中國時報》只因為對如何搶救民進黨的見解與蔡英文不同，就必須被汙名化？

民進黨各路天王爭搶黨魁，不該被關注嗎？如果民進黨是一個不被期待的黨，是一個人人皆曰可拋棄的政黨，自然沒有人要競逐黨主席，綠天王競相投入黨魁選舉，這對八年執政之後，頓失政權的民進黨而言，該是樁可喜可賀之事，難不成蔡主席希望民進黨如國民黨萬民擁戴馬英九般，萬民擁戴蔡英文？

身為媒體，《中國時報》若非對民進黨愛深責切，可以不理會所謂綠天王競選黨主席之事，蔡主席如此激烈有失理性的言論，我們並不想妄加揣度，但請蔡主席批評前先想想：民進黨是不是沒有任何人要競選黨主席？或者，蔡主席有意要準備連任，期待其他天王退讓之？不論實情是什麼？作為媒體，難道都不能報導評論？

蔡英文出身於國民黨執政時期，曾為李前總統的幕僚，她的背景和專業，讓她迥異於過去一般認知的「政客」，因為她的專業、她內斂精準的政治語言，讓政壇藍綠黨公職很難對她講出任何難聽的話，因為，她不該是一個只知操作民粹，動員深綠的獨派，她應該是一個講究政治方法論，知曉如何說服中間選民向民進黨靠攏的政黨領袖，二○○八總統大選之後，民進黨天王俱退位，讓她在風平浪靜中接任這個她不熟悉的政黨領袖職務，所為何來？不過就是希望她帶領民進黨走出不一樣的路。但是，蔡英文退縮了。

蔡英文是否要再任民進黨主席？就像民進黨內天王競逐黨魁般，是可受公評之事，《中國時報》報導熱熱烈烈的黨主席選舉，何錯之有？

蔡英文批評《中國時報》對馬政府政策未提出批判，她真的說錯了，第一，《中國時報》從未鬆懈對執政者的批判，即使國民黨主席選舉一人競選，《中國時報》依舊嚴厲監督；第二，套用天王之一的前行政院長蘇貞昌的一句話：光靠罵國民黨，別想再執政；光靠罵媒體，還是卸除不了在野政黨的責任！