Disinformation, Defamation, and Stonewalling: Stepping over the Corpses of Farmers

Disinformation, Defamation, and Stonewalling: Stepping over the Corpses of Farmers
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
November 30, 2011

Summary: Agricultural issues have long been considered the DPP's strong suit. But the DPP committed a major blunder with its "persimmons for only two dollars a catty" propaganda campaign. Flagrantly false allegations that persimmons were being sold at fire sale prices seriously hurt fruit growers. But everyone in the DPP from Chairman Tsai Ing-wen on down continues stonewalling. The DPP has yet to issue a single word of apology. Is this the behavior of a party that trumpets its solidarity with farmers?

Full Text Below:

Agricultural issues have long been considered the DPP's strong suit. But the DPP committed a major blunder with its "persimmons for only two dollars a catty" propaganda campaign. Flagrantly false allegations that persimmons were being sold at fire sale prices seriously hurt fruit growers. But everyone in the DPP from Chairman Tsai Ing-wen on down continues stonewalling. The DPP has yet to issue a single word of apology. Is this the behavior of a party that trumpets its solidarity with farmers?

The DPP has long played the agricultural card. The subsidies for elderly farmers controversy left the KMT battered and bruised, and forced to play catch up. The Mainland recently signed contracts with fish farmers in Tainan's Xuejia District for farm raised milkfish. Some fishermen said that even though they had accepted purchase orders from the Mainland, they would still vote for the DPP. The DPP has probably concluded that it has a lock on the traditional farming and fishing industry vote. Therefore it can ignore the plight of these grass roots voters. It has probably concluded that in order to undermine the ruling party, it can get away with distorting the facts, falsely claiming that persimmons are being sold at fire sale prices, and inflicting serious harm on farmers.

In order to depict the KMT as inept, the DPP is willing to undermine fruit prices again and again, forcing fruit growers to endure massive losses. The DPP launched a "Wasted Labor" fruit calendar propaganda campaign. Each month the calendar features a fruit whose price has plummeted. The DPP's intention was to make the KMT look bad, The fruits featured include oranges at 4.8 dollars per catty, oranges at 6 dollars, bananas at 2 dollars, papayas at 3 dollars, longans at 4 dollars, lychees at 10 dollars, guavas at 5 dollars, top-grafted pears at record lows, grapefruit at 4 dollars, persimmons at 2 dollars, and apple pears at prices that have fallen precipitously. Finally, the month of December features a giant question mark, rhetorically demanding, "who's next?"

Prices for agricultural products are unsatisfactory. This may be due to problems with production and marketing, resulting in harm to farmers. The government should be concerned and should seek solutions. But the DPP's propaganda campaign contains considerable misinformation or disinformation. It has raised considerable controversy. For example, the month of May features longans. But longans are not in season until July and August. Another example is persimmons in October, at 2 dollars per catty. This is not the actual market price, and has provoked anxiety and anger among persimmon growers. Once this DPP propaganda was released, fruit wholesalers and consumers demanded that persimmon growers sell them persimmons at these artificially concocted prices. Wholesalers were forced to return 60% of their consignments. Even consumers concluded that persimmon prices were too high and refused to buy.

The DPP's propaganda campaign destroyed the persimmon market, It caused innocent persimmon growers untold harm. Not a single person up or down the ranks of the DPP has expressed regret, Party Chairman Tsai Ing-wen took the lead. She said the two dollars a catty price referred to the price at the first point of sale, the orchards. President Ma said the price referred to was the wholesale price. Tsai Ing-wen called Ma Ying-jeou ignorant. But as soon as Tsai Ing-wen's remark got out fruit growers confirmed that the price at the first point of sale was the wholesale price. Tsai Ing-wen was the one who revealed her ignorance while feigning expertise. Tsai Huang-lang then chimed in. He said the persimmons referred to in the DPP's propaganda campaign were not upscale persimmons, but beefheart persimmons from Taitung. But this attempt at damage control was immediately refuted by Taitung farmers. Fruit growers said that beefheart persimmons were low volume products. Even beef heart persimmons were 20 to 30 dollars per catty. They could hardly be the persimmons selling for two dollars per catty shown in the DPP's fruit calendar campaign. Besides, the persimmons illustrated in the DPP's propaganda campaign were clearly sweet persimmons.

The DPP then made a third attempt at damage control. Spokesman Chen Chi-mai said the DPP got its information from a local paper, the China Times. Chen said that according to the China Time, Taitung beefheart persimmon prices had plunged. The wholesale price was only one or two dollars per catty. He said the DPP campaign cited this data. But the reporter responsible for the article explained that the price was only for seconds. it was only for defective produce. It was not the price for normal produce. It was not the price for the high grade persimmons illustrated in the DPP's propaganda campaign. Furthermore, as the China Times reporter explained, the news report said the price was "two dollars each." This was a far cry from the "two dollars per catty" for high quality fruit cited in the DPP's propaganda campaign, It was the price for seconds. It was clearly a unit price. Yet the DPP claimed it was a per catty price. The DPP misled consumers and wholesalers, It hurt farmers. It even undermined fruit vendors.

Seeing no way to escape the persimmons fiasco, Tsai Ing-wen passed the buck onto DPP propaganda personnel, saying they may have used the wrong photograph. She said they "regretted" what they did. But what exactly did Tsai Ing-wen regret? Did she regret the fact that the DPP's carelessness and sloppiness caused farmers unnecessary losses? Or did she regret the fact that DPP "mishaps" angered farmers, the flames scorched the DPP, and undermined its election campaign?

This is hardly the first time the DPP has spread disinformation and undermined the price of agricultural products. Persimmons are hardly the sole example. The DPP has repeatedly poor mouthed guava and banana prices, forcing wholesalers to sell their inventory at fire sale prices, and allowing consumers to snap them up on the cheap. Su Jia-chyuan was once Chairman of the Council of Agriculture. He ought to understand the farmers' plight, The DPP has long maintained that farmers are a key source of its political support, It has been only too ready to demagogue farm issues. Yet the DPP is apparently indifferent to farmers, In order to lash out against the KMT, it has no qualms about shooting off its mouth and incurring losses among farmers. The DPP has probably concluded that farmers are "yellow dog" DPP supporters. They will continue to support the party no matter how shabbily it treats them. What can one do but sigh? Do these politicians even have consciences?

誤導+汙衊+硬拗 踩著農民打選戰
2011-11-30 00:58 中國時報

農業議題一向被認為是民進黨的「主場」，但「兩塊錢一斤的柿子」卻讓民進黨栽了一個大跟斗，明顯不合事實的低價柿子已對農民造成傷害。但民進黨從蔡英文主席以降，至今仍在拗，一句道歉認錯都沒有，這是口口聲聲要跟農民站在一起的政黨應該有的表現嗎？

民進黨向來愛打農業牌，前段時間，老農津貼逼得國民黨灰頭土臉，不得不跟進。日前，大陸對台南學甲契作養殖虱目魚，一些漁民還表示，就算拿了大陸的訂單，票還是會投民進黨。或許民進黨就是認定傳統農漁村的選票，怎麼樣都是其囊中物，所以才會輕忽基層選民的艱困處境，為了打擊執政黨，不惜歪曲事實，低報柿子的價格，嚴重損及果農的利益也在所不惜。

為了凸顯國民黨執政不力，造成水果價格一再探底，讓果農承受巨大的損失，民進黨製作了一分「攏總無採工」 的水果月曆文宣，每個月列出一種價格慘跌的水果，意在給國民黨難看，包括：柳橙一台斤四．八元、橘子六元、香蕉二元、木瓜三元、龍眼四元、荔枝十元、芭樂五元、高接梨創歷史新低、柚子四元、柿子兩元、水梨價格直落，而「十二月」的水果則打上了「換誰滯銷」的問號。

農產品價格不理想，或者產銷制度有問題，致使農民受損，政府的確應該關注並提出解決之道。不過，這份文宣有不少錯誤的資訊，引發外界高度爭議，如月曆上標示五月分的水果是龍眼，但龍眼是七、八月的水果；又如十月份的水果柿子，標明一斤兩塊錢，不符行情，造成各地柿農的焦急與憤怒，因為民進黨的這份文宣一出，水果中盤商和消費者都要求用低價跟柿農買柿子，盤商退貨六成，甚至有消費者認為柿農的價格太貴，不買了。

此份文宣打壞柿子行情，連累無辜柿農受損，民進黨上上下下竟沒有一個人為此感到抱歉，黨主席蔡英文帶頭拗說一斤兩塊錢是指產地收購價，馬總統提到的比較高的價格則是指批發價，蔡英文批評馬英九沒有常識。但蔡英文此言一出，立刻有農友反駁指出，產地收購價就是批發價，不懂還裝懂的人是蔡英文。蔡煌瑯則接著說，文宣上所說的「柿子」並非較為高檔的甜柿，而是台東的牛心柿。但這種說講法又立刻被台東果農駁斥，果農說，牛心柿產量很少，但即使是牛心柿一台斤都還有廿到卅元，哪來水果文宣上說的一斤兩塊錢；更何況，水果文宣上的圖片明明就是甜柿。

民進黨再出第三招，發言人陳其邁說，民進黨是看到《中國時報》地方新聞得知，台東牛心柿價格慘跌，產地收購價一顆只有一、兩塊錢，所以才有文宣上的資訊。然而，記者報導的是次級品、不良品的價格，並不是一般正常銷售品，更不是民進黨文宣上的高檔柿子；更何況，報導說的是「一顆」兩塊錢，這跟「一斤」兩塊錢差很大──文宣品上用的是高品質的水果圖案，但卻標示次級品的價格，明明是單顆的價格卻說成是一斤的價格，誤導消費者與盤商，傷害了果農，也對攤商的生意造成了影響。

眼見柿子圖檔的問題無可逃避，蔡英文只好說民進黨的文宣人員可能有誤植照片的情形，非常「遺憾」──蔡英文是遺憾因為民進黨的粗心、草率，讓農民承受了不必要的損失，還是遺憾文宣人員「太不小心」，引發農民怒火，且火勢向民進黨延燒不止，對選情造成影響？

其實民進黨散布不實消息，影響農產品的價格，柿子並不是唯一的例子；芭樂、香蕉也都是因為民進黨一再唱衰，造成盤商殺價、消費者觀望的現象。蘇嘉全曾任農委會主委，理當了解農民的艱苦，更何況民進黨一向認為農民是其重要的票倉，操作農業相關議題，樂此不疲；然而，民進黨似乎也並不真的把農民權益放在心上，為了打擊國民黨，信口開河造成農民的損失也無所謂。如此吃定向來相挺的農民，實在讓人喟嘆，政治人物的良心何在啊。