影子政府召集人
長仔的噗浪:
frankcthsieh(dance)我二十年前推動四大優先(台灣.文化.環境.弱勢),昨天終於聽到馬英九說經濟發展要[環境優先],希望這個理念真的會成為社會的共識,落實在政策和行為上...
( 回應: 173 ) 歡迎討論!!

Plurk 噗浪表情頭像下載 點我!請給我們一點鼓勵 全民來認股 守護白海豚

名家 Blog 精選
馬小九部落格雲程的雙魚鏡金恒偉Passion: 慕容理深のblog李敏勇陳茂雄羅致政鄒景雯的部落格昆蟲綠色年代影像館旭日之丘重灌狂人

台灣長工會

人權律師新文化工作隊三分鐘護台灣運動台灣派電台 鄭南榕電影百萬劇本獎

MJ:簡單讀英文-國際媒體觀察:陳水扁聲押的台灣形象

國際媒體觀察:陳水扁聲押的台灣形象

2008/11/12

MJ

台灣因為陳水扁聲押事件而登上國際版面,這是觀察國際報導的好時機,也是對比國內媒體是否過於激化的好機會。

今天聯合報有一則新聞頭條是:扁遭收押 國際媒體大篇幅報導(連結可能失效),裡面舉了許多國際知名媒體對此事的報導,講得很像全世界都認同此次收押,是台灣國恥,或者全球都跟國內媒體一樣感到超級振奮,連入監獄得脫光光檢查也寫,似乎跟此有人不共戴天仇。十分有意思。

但且讓我們一手來看看國內媒體似乎遺漏的部分吧,一如我前兩次已經說了,國際上已有媒體開始注意到台灣有條惡法,可讓檢察官不經起訴就直接押人。我比較想看看是否有更多國際媒體有進一步注意到此事。

我不舉一般通訊社比如路透、美聯這類通訊社,因為他們有時報導會比較粗糙,直接引用國內媒體資料。我們看看大家耳熟能詳的美國全國性報紙:

華爾街日報:兩句話斃了台灣檢察官

Mr. Chen's accountant and three of his senior advisers already have been detained in the corruption case but not indicted. Prosecutors in Taiwan are allowed to detain suspects for four months before an indictment.

No evidence in the case has been made public. Taiwanese law requires all information be kept secret during an investigation.

(全文)



在談論此次陳水扁聲押時,華爾街日報在文章中特別分段說明,台灣檢察官可不經起訴就直接把嫌疑犯押上好幾個月。

它又另開一段特別說明:本案都還沒有任何證據攤在陽光下給大眾瞭解。

華爾街日報會把這個聲押背後的法條開出兩個段落來說明,顯然是要它的讀者瞭解,「這件事,外界都還看不到任何起訴證據,人犯就直接被檢察官關起來了。」

華爾街日報怎麼形容陳水扁呢?

Mr. Chen's stance alienated many voters, but many Taiwanese view him as almost a folk hero for his role seeking international recognition for the island.



這句話很恰如其份,許多台灣人認同他追求台灣國際認同的角色,並視他為英雄(folk hero..有點傳奇性人物)。


紐約時報:馬走上終極統一路線

The detention is the latest chapter in a series of political dramas that have been unfolding in Taiwan for a few years as the island's two major parties, the Kuomintang and the Democratic Progressive Party, have bickered over relations with China and traded accusations of corruption.

(全文)

紐約時報沒有提到聲押的是怎麼回事,但把此事定調在:這是國民黨與民進黨多年來的惡鬥,這個惡鬥指的是雙方如何看待中國的態度,同時也指出雙方其實都有相互指控貪污的事情。言下之意,頗有用台灣兩黨喜歡用司法惡搞對方的意味。

紐約時報對於陳水扁的形象也有如下描述:

A populist with a penchant for fiery rhetoric, he was known during his two terms for his strong opposition to Beijing and his insistence that Taiwan, which separated from China in 1949, was not a province of the mainland.


亦即他力抗北京,並強力主張台灣不是中國的一省。(加分,免費為台灣宣傳)

但這裡用了一個populist(群眾主義者)的字眼來形容陳水扁。populist有人翻做民粹,但我一直搞不懂「民粹」是什麼意思。我用個比較粗淺的方式來比喻這個字眼,電視節目。一般商業電視台可視為populist,電視台會注意觀眾喜歡看什麼,留意收視率,然後投其所好,好一點的像「星光大道」老少咸宜,但若過份的話就像「霹靂火」這樣喜歡大灑狗血。因此講陳水扁是populist有點說他喜歡「討好選民」的意思。

跟populist相反的就是elitist(菁英主義者),公視可視為這種代表,它不需要因應觀眾喜好來播節目,而是依照他們認為觀眾該看什麼節目來播放,反正又不需廣告收入,不需媚俗討好市場。但若太走菁英制,有時也會跟市場脫節,比如現在的馬英九與劉兆玄也有這種傾向,他們不認為需傾聽民意,「反正只要聽我領導就好了,選民有我的睿智嗎」。也因此你看馬劉對於許多政策,甚至是野草莓運動都展示出一種十分輕蔑的態度。(以上比喻若有失真,歡迎指正)

紐約時報在報導陳水扁的同時,還有一段描述馬英九的:

Mr. Ma, who took office in May, has pushed for closer ties with the mainland and opened the possibility of eventual reunification.


它寫:馬英九力推與中共更緊密的關係,為未來終極統一做鋪路。

馬總統,或許在國內大家現在霧裡看花,不知道您的態度,但為何紐約時報可以把您的作為看得這麼清楚呢?怪哉!


Marketwatch(道瓊公司的專業財經網站)

On Tuesday Chen was questioned for about five hours by prosecutors, who subsequently arrested him under a Taiwanese law that enables authorities to imprison a suspect for as long as four months before indictment.

Newspapers across Asia Wednesday carried front-page images of Chen, handcuffed hands raised over his head, in an apparent gesture signaling he is a martyr defending Taiwan's democracy and sovereignty.

(全文)


Marketwatch的文章同樣點出陳水扁的收押,是在沒有起訴的狀況下直接收押,這是台灣特有的法令。

它另描述陳水扁那個高舉手銬高喊台灣民主與主權的畫面,塑造烈士形象。

以上我只稍微舉了三家重量級國際媒體的報導,我們可看出三點:

1. 陳水扁是在沒有起訴的狀況下,直接被關起來;

2. 檢方還沒公布任何證據;

3. 馬英九與中共關係密切,有朝終極統一前進的傾向。

看得出來嗎?嗅得到政治味嗎?別再跟我說這完全是「司法獨立」的事了。此事放在國內,媒體所報導的貪污總額已經累積到了10億。

但你看這麼注重財經數字的包括華爾街日報、道瓊的MarketWatch根本都沒寫這些金額,它只輕輕問了兩句話,國內的檢察官就露出馬腳了:

1. 請問為何還沒起訴,就可把人關起來?

2. 請問證據公布了嗎?

昨天我看到有個台老美的部落格寫說,國內檢察官若喜歡玩這種「沒起訴先押人取供」的花招,應該可去Guantanamo應徵工作(看過Tom Cruise主演的A Few Good Men嗎?),裡面有不少同好。

啊?檢察官不知道Guantanamo是什麼地方?那麻煩去請教李昌鈺博士如何?

快速連結:
想獲得謝長廷、影子政府最新的資訊嗎?歡迎加入 長仔的噗浪影子政府的噗浪facebook
您尚未登入系統唷 [ 註冊 登入 ]
  • # 14480
  • stefwho , 發言:
2008-11-19 01:00:05
subsequent articles:

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/chinacalling/archive/2008/11/12/fallout-from-chen-shui-bian-s-dramatic-arrest.aspx

and from South China Morning Post:

Ties that blind
Improved cross-strait relations appear to have come at a cost to some civil liberties in Taiwan
Jerome Cohen
Updated on Nov 13, 2008
Last week's historic visit to Taiwan by Beijing's cross-strait chief, Chen Yunlin , which culminated in four useful agreements, focused attention on issues of human rights as well as politics. Some issues concerned the proper government response to public protests in a free society. Others involved fair investigation of former and present government leaders suspected of corruption.
Chinese have recognised the importance of protecting foreign envoys for almost 3,000 years. The feudal states that contended for power before establishment of the Qin dynasty reciprocally assured the personal safety of their emissaries. Such protection has continued to be indispensable to inter-state co-operation.
After police in Tainan failed to prevent an assault on Mr Chen's deputy, president Ma Ying-jeou's government was obligated to do better during Mr Chen's visit. Although police could not prevent Mr Chen from being trapped in a hotel for eight hours by a huge mob of protesters, they did defend him against bodily harm throughout a stressful week.
In doing so, they went beyond the limits of a free society, forbidding peaceful protesters from displaying Taiwanese and Tibetan flags, confiscating flags from demonstrators, closing a store that played Taiwanese songs and seeking to minimise the visitors' awareness of the protests. There were also incidents of police brutality, albeit sometimes in response to violent provocations by demonstrators.
The police misconduct even outraged many local supporters of Mr Chen's visit. Mr Ma, in addition to implementing his campaign pledge to sponsor revision of the Assembly and Parade Law to eliminate protesters' need for advance official permission, should recommend amendments prohibiting the kind of undemocratic police practices that recently occurred and order training designed to enhance police compliance with the law. It is encouraging to note that Democratic Progressive Party chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen, who led the massive opposition demonstration, has subsequently called not only for a government review of police misconduct but also for a re-examination by her own party of its failures to maintain order among its demonstrators. The DPP, if it is to fulfil its essential role as democratic opposition, must not degenerate into an army of street fighters.
Some Taiwanese and foreign critics took the occasion of Mr Chen's visit to call attention to another crucial feature of democratic government - the fair prosecution of current and former officials suspected of corruption. The critics voiced three serious complaints about recent arrests and incommunicado detentions of prominent DPP figures who have served as government officials. They imply that the DPP is being singled out for prosecutions while corruption among Kuomintang leaders is being ignored. They also claim that: most DPP suspects have been held incommunicado without a court examination of the justification for their detentions; and that prosecutors' offices have been leaking detrimental information about the suspects to the media while denying them knowledge of the leaks and a chance to refute the "trial by press".
These practices, it is said, bring into question the political neutrality of the judiciary, and the presumption of innocence and other elements of due process required for the fair and open trials essential to democracy, raising the spectre of the unjust procedures of "the dark days of martial law" (1947-1987). It is not clear whether critics' claims of "selective prosecution" are well founded. Recent arrests may simply reflect massive corruption by the DPP, which dominated executive government for the past eight years - corruption that allegedly reached as high as former president Chen Shui-bian and his family.
Oddly, although during the Chen administration some prosecutions were brought against both DPP and KMT figures, some obvious KMT targets were overlooked despite reportedly thick dossiers compiled by Control Yuan investigators. Mr Ma should appoint a commission of impartial experts to review such prosecutions.
It does not appear that any of the recently detained DPP figures were denied a court hearing or their right to counsel. Moreover, there is a legislative basis for the courts' decisions to detain them incommunicado for up to four months of investigation if there is a reasonable basis for believing that the suspects might otherwise falsify evidence. Yet, in view of the harshness of this pre-indictment sanction and the obstacles it creates to mounting an adequate defence, it ought to be invoked rarely.
Certainly, the Legislative Yuan, or the commission suggested here, should re-examine legislation to strike a new balance between the threat of corruption to a democratic government and the threat of incommunicado detention to civil liberty.
The charge of biased prosecution leaks to the press seems to be the most straightforward of the critics' complaints. Such leaks, which occur in many countries, do appear to have taken place and cannot be allowed in a democratic system.
Jerome A. Cohen is co-director of NYU's US-Asia Law Institute and adjunct senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations
  • # 14276
  • lilychiu , 發言:
2008-11-16 14:15:05
MJ這篇文寫的真好。好到我讀完之後,在電腦前向你致敬呢!
為何誇你好呢?因為中央社的"語譯系統",讓我以為全世界的人都認同馬您政府的枉顧人權,濫用司法共成一氣呢!"好佳在",台灣有你真好!
再則,你的道德勇氣也是令我佩服的!因為,不可諱言的,經過八年的"媒體法庭","名嘴法官"撲天蓋地,指證歷歷的"渲染"後,我們都用有一點顏色,甚或未審先判的角度去看待扁案.即便覺得怪怪的,但又拿不出證據反駁他們,只能以轉臺做無聲的抗議.但其中最實際的心境也是自己深怕被人說為是挺貪腐的鄉愿,而不敢大聲的要評論者拿出讓人心服口服的真憑實據來.
如果時間倒返,猶記得2000年水蓮配居然終結了國民黨在台當政主權的延續.這樣的震撼,這樣的結果,這樣的衝擊,對藍營的掌權者與既得利益者是可想而知的.果不其然,水蓮配於五月上任,九月就已經開始喊出罷免聲.從那時起,台灣的社會便開始了一場永無止境的媒體戰.每天打開電視,就是無標無的的謾罵,鮮少討論政策的優劣,盡是雞蛋挑骨頭,空口白話的指証言論.官員備詢,最常聽到的是[你下台],[你無恥]....等等,幾近乎歇斯底里的咆哮,整整四年,每天照三餐罵.
2004年,執政效果不彰加上大環境也略所影響之下,部份人民依舊喊出[肚子扁扁,還是投扁]的口號,姑且不論有沒有一顆子彈的影響.光是這句口號,就可以窺知,陳水扁對台灣三.四百萬的人民確實有其不可言喻的影響力.因為畢竟民以食為天,能讓人民擱置民生問題,進而轉化為行動,票票入櫃.此等群眾魅力遠遠超過所有偏獨的領導者.撇開政蹟.司法不論,這樣的群眾影響號招力,當然是讓統派不得不"關注"的一股"惡勢力".以致第一家庭甚或幕僚及部會官員的一言一行,都被用顯微鏡"監看"著,用非常另類的解讀觀察著.動不動就是罪大惡極,動不動就是無恥至極,這樣醜化的過程,這八年,大家應該記憶猶新.
再者,挺綠選民的屬性是極度要求要清簾的.遇有官司的同志,往往不知其真假或等其司法判決,往往都是先行採取切割甚或鄙夷的態度.如此的屬性,無疑是提供有心人極其容易從中分化,醜化的機會.想當年,國民黨在大陸時,也是被共產黨以貪污之名整肅,終至失盡民心,斷送江山.續論,扁案之偵辦已逾年載,根據八年的"媒體法庭"及"名嘴法官",鋪天蓋地,指證歷歷,應該早就可以推出午門論斬了,怎會到阿扁高舉上了手銬的雙手到了羈押庭,還落得法官一句「看筆錄內容也沒指涉陳水扁,還沒有辦法咬上陳水扁,怎麼可以說他犯罪嫌疑重大,需要羈押?」.我們是不是欠阿扁一個公平接受司法審判的公道呢?
如果阿扁真的做錯了,就該勇於面對司法,但如果硬要用政治手段解決司法問題,那我想我們就不能等閒視之了,因為難保有一天也會發生在你我的身上.
  • # 14250
  • nuivone , 發言:
2008-11-15 04:26:18
MJ這篇文寫的真好。

大概是因為上回遊行的事,大部分媒體大肆標榜國外媒體報導台灣"暴民""民主倒退""國家形象透過全世界重要媒體不斷地傳播後受到嚴重傷害"後,被不少有良好閱讀習慣及英文能力者以原文+翻譯踢翻其報導真實性後,換個方法用「斷章取義」or「以偏概全」再來。

不管是標題還是內文,那些媒體長期都只是要暗示、引導民眾思考感受,傳遞他們想讓民眾吸收的資訊。
因為大部分的人不會特意上網去看外電,也不見得有能力閱讀外電。
這或許反應國內有些新聞媒體自覺公信力有失,想藉引用國外媒體報導替自己說服。
美其名叫打開國際視窗,實話是,如果自己英文文藻能力都不夠準確翻譯外電,先不講職業道德,這類報導是否掛羊頭賣狗肉?又或是˙˙˙刻意曲解文意的?

收押那天紐約時報刊載了相關訊息,深受台灣媒體教育的友人刻意將文轉貼給我,並語帶羞憤,約略是認為連紐約時報都報了,真是丟臉丟到全世界。
然而其雖引用最熱門的那張雙手舉高的照片,內文卻從未以非客觀字句評論或陳述對台灣形象的貶抑。
3篇關於此事件的文章都只有單純客觀的描述事件經過、陳述事件大綱、陳先生或馬先生的簡略背景、兩方的政治立場、陳先生和馬先生的關係。
沒有一個用字是模糊或獨具想像空間的,簡單來說就是,實話實說。文構方式不若台灣綜藝化的新聞媒體為刺激民眾感官,吸引注意,所善用的修飾、隱喻、引導這類撰文手法。
(真要說有空間的,大概就是內文描述馬先生那段的eventual reunification這兩個字。果然是旁觀者清。)

只是當從不看外電也沒有足夠英文閱讀能力的友人,以那樣的態度貼文給我時,
讓我愕然意識到,政府與媒體根深的愚民政策,將會讓台灣,有一個怎樣的未來˙˙˙。
- 返回頁首 -
捐款帳號
銀行: 合作金庫銀行雙連分行 銀行代號: 006
戶名: 財團法人台灣維新基金會 帳號: 0925-717-106-699
註冊 | 登入 | 系統公告 | FAQ
馬英九內捷弊案被控瀆職、圖利
375
馬英九 2008年1月28日承認擁有綠卡,距今
916
李慶安 2008年3月12日遭踢爆雙重國籍,所領薪資經費至今不歸還
872
郭冠英 2009年3月11日被揭發以「范蘭欽」筆名辱台,距今
508
潮寮毒氣事件 2008年12月1日發生,環保署至今找不到事故原因
608
貓纜 2008年10月1日開始停駛,距今
669
李漢卿 2008年11月4日侵入上揚唱片行,距今
635
中國 2008年9月11日承認產品含有三聚氰胺,距今
689
尹啟銘 2008年5月07日股市目標兩萬點,距今
816
現在他們還沒道歉,究竟要逃避多久?
more
影子政府