This year, due to the Wuhan pneumonia epidemic, when you turn on the TV or check electronic news, you'll notice the coverage is almost entirely dominated by Wuhan pneumonia. Taiwan's disease prevention has been cautious, and the CDC regularly holds press conferences to release epidemic information. As media outlets tasked with delivering information, while they can obtain first-hand news, on the other hand, under the volume of information, there's a risk of causing excessive public panic. For instance, reporting on long queues at mask factories and shortages of masks and hand sanitizer at convenience stores and pharmacies will inevitably, to some extent, heighten public anxiety about the epidemic.
(Media coverage of queues at mask factories)
On January 30, NCC released a statement stating: "In response to the increase in confirmed cases of 'Severe Special Infectious Pneumonia' (Wuhan pneumonia in China), and to prevent the transmission and spread of false information that may hinder disease prevention efforts or mislead the public and cause social panic, the National Communications Commission (NCC) urges broadcast media to approach epidemic information coverage with seriousness and caution. Facing the serious harm that misinformation may bring, broadcast media should actively fulfill fact-checking obligations when reporting or commenting on epidemic-related information, avoid using speculative or sensational language to spread false information, demonstrate journalistic professionalism, embody the social responsibility of media as a public instrument, strengthen internal controls and self-regulation mechanisms, and ensure legal compliance. Those in violation will be strictly penalized according to law to fully protect the public's viewing rights to accurate information."
In short, it's calling for "broadcast media" self-regulation—yes, only broadcast media, not online media to self-regulate reporting on Wuhan pneumonia! Frequently you'll see netizens asking in comments "Why not regulate online media?" Let me briefly introduce the NCC—National Communications Commission—and its regulatory scope: telecommunications services, broadcasting services, and digital convergence. In summary, it manages "electronic media": cable television, terrestrial television, radio (FM/AM), and telecommunications. But not the internet!
Because "electronic" actually refers to media that occupy "spectrum" and other public resources, the internet has no spectrum issue, and therefore is not under NCC jurisdiction.
Why is spectrum public property? Precisely because of "spectrum scarcity theory"
A brief explanation of "spectrum scarcity theory"
In April 1912, the Titanic struck an iceberg in the North Atlantic and sank. The United States began to take seriously the importance of regulating wireless radio communications. That same August, Congress passed the "Radio Act of 1912," which emphasized that radio waves are a scarce resource to be shared by all people and should be managed and allocated by the government to prevent the monopolization of radio waves by a few.
From the perspective of spectrum scarcity, broadcast channels are public goods. When frequencies are opened for application, consideration should be given to the interests of the listening public (both listeners and non-listeners), the allocation efficiency of existing broadcast channels, media access for disadvantaged groups, and supply-demand dynamics in the advertising market.
How to effectively utilize radio frequency spectrum, realize ideals of public interest and public service, and even the right to media access is the primary consideration for countries in allocating and managing radio frequencies; especially for the important basis of allocating non-commercial broadcast frequencies.
Precisely for this reason, television and electronic media are regarded as "public property" with social responsibilities. Therefore, news legally must not contain product placement or advertising, and content suitable for all ages falls under "general" classification, hence regulations requiring pixelation of suspects in TV news footage, frame-skipping of fights and accidents, color-changing of blood, and so on.
In lifestyle reporting, the same story must feature two or more brands, or brand logos must be pixelated. Word choice must be carefully considered, as these all concern public interest. If regulations are exceeded, NCC will impose fines. (Of course, TV still has product placement, just done skillfully enough that you can't tell, like X Music Festival, X Chang, X Cai, and so on.)
But the internet is different. The internet is a free realm. Currently, heavy users are between ages 15 and 35. Because Taiwan has freedom of speech, before the crackdown on fake news, there was essentially no government agency managing online media. However, this doesn't mean there's no way to regulate it. Taiwan uses the "Child and Youth Welfare Act" to manage online content. The Facebook that everyone commonly uses has also begun implementing mechanisms to manage graphic content, but this is still an immature phase—graphic and violent content remains easily accessible.
Child and Youth Welfare Act, Article 46-1
"No one shall distribute or transmit content harmful to the physical and mental health of children and youth on the internet without adopting clear and feasible protective measures, or without cooperating with protective mechanisms provided by internet platform providers, allowing children and youth to access or view such content."
These few brief lines manage online content. Therefore, when negative news involving underage children or youth occurs, such as rape or abuse, clothing is color-changed, heavily pixelated, and graphic images are pixelated, to prevent youth from accessing content that might "affect their wellbeing." Consequently, word choice isn't as meticulous, and balanced reporting sections, like legal aspects, are done less rigorously. But this boundary falls in a "gray area."
Online news uses "click-through rate" to judge whether a news story is "good," and you can know the click count immediately in real-time. Therefore, many pieces will reappear with a different headline, or images will be partially obscured to spark curiosity. Headlines use "misleading" language to deceive readers—all for clicks. With this standard, over time, people disregard content quality, depth, and professionalism; as long as there are clicks, it's good news. (Of course, more professional media outlets are outside this discussion, like The Reporter, Initium Media, and so on, which prioritize content.)
Television news uses "ratings" to evaluate daily performance, using Nielsen as the standard, with ratings data available the next day. But content isn't primary; factors like "commercial breaks" and "ad time" affect news ratings. Think about your TV viewing experience—when an ad comes on, don't you change the channel? That's a "commercial break." If the ad is long, don't you lose patience?
That's "time." Therefore, on-air TV editors have screens full of competing news channels, monitoring which station is airing ads, which is showing which story, to immediately adjust news broadcast order. As for content quality, that's really left to each television media outlet's leadership's personal judgment.
Online and television media have completely different mindsets. This article doesn't assert which is more professional or shallow; it simply expresses that online and television are different news media with different operations, different emphases, different regulations, and therefore naturally have differences. I hope this article helps the public develop greater media literacy.
Other articles on media: Elevating Press Release Commercial Value—Using 'Agenda Setting' to Manipulate Media! Decoding 5 Types of Journalist Selection Thinking
Author: Karen
Graduate of National Chung Cheng University's Institute of Telecommunications and Broadcasting | Published papers at Fudan University in Shanghai; specializes in audience and news media research
Former reporter for HK01 Group and Initium Media | Former TVBS News text reporter | Former CTi News text reporter | Former ETtoday social media editor | Former media consultant at GoSky startup company
Contact: info@ladykaren.org
