A call to #don't turn fact-checking into disinformation and political manipulation

The motivation for writing this article is to stumble upon this article by @taiwanfact-checking center 2020 presidential election televised debate audit report. The first time I contacted the Fact-Checking Center felt like a long time ago. The second time I contacted the Fact-Checking Center was the fact-checking article about Hong Kong's anti-extradition campaign, and it was also because that inspection improved my impression of the Inspection Center a lot. So when I read this article, I was quite surprised by the biased content and the obvious position. The Fact-Checking Center did fact-checking on 17 questions, but 6 of the 17 checks were wrong or controversial, accounting for up to 35%. The fact-checking center, which prides itself on being objective, neutral, and truth-seeking, is really shocking to find such fact-checking. In addition, the verification of this article is clearly out of balance. Of the 17 fact-checking questions, 14 questions, or 82%, favor a particular candidate, with only Q15, Q14, and Q12 favoring another candidate. Such a high proportion and such bias are quite rare even in some pro-green media. With the advent of the Internet age and the transformation of the media, the means by which the media manipulates politics are constantly escalating. And biased reporting or biased inspection of only one candidate while letting go of his opponent is a new means of political manipulation. Are reports like the Fact-Checking Center such political manipulation or is it really because a candidate's cautious speech at a debate has no place for fact-checking? I lean toward the former because, even though the debate was yesterday, I can think of at least ten questions about the other candidate that are worth examining by the same standard, just from memory. Therefore, this paper will be divided into two parts. The first part is an examination of the textual content of the Fact-Checking Center. The second part cites ten other candidate's speeches that deserve to be checked according to the same standard.

first part

wrong part

Q8: Is it true that Lianhe Daily's question and Han Guoyu's mention of "Tsai Ing-wen's confiscation of the referendum"?

The Fact Checking Center concluded that [partially inconsistent with the information examined]

The reason is that the Tsai Ing-wen government has not changed the threshold of the referendum, but only decoupled the referendum from the general election.

Has the threshold for the referendum been changed? Of course there is. Decoupling the referendum from the general election directly allows the referendum to pass the threshold several notches higher than before, because it is related to the turnout. The voter turnout of Taiwanese people has been declining year by year, and in the 2016 general election, it was only 66%. If you think this turnout is already low, let's take a look at the by-election turnout. (1)

If compared with the voter turnout of previous legislative by-elections, the voter turnout in Taichung's legislative by-election was only 25.34%, which was the lowest ever, and the second lowest was the 27.57% voter turnout in the by-election of Tainan City's 4th constituency in the 100th year of the Republic of China. 30.39% is the third lowest.

Such a low turnout discouraged all parties in the referendum. Therefore, last year, the various referendum leading groups all calculated carefully in order to hold the referendum and the general election together, and there was a grand occasion of receiving ten referendums. Now the DPP government is forcing the decoupling of the referendum from the general election, and linking the referendum with the low turnout rate, isn't it just raising the referendum threshold in disguise? What's even more amusing is that the DPP government also set a special polling day for the referendum, which was mocked by the media as "referendum memorial day". Lv Xiulian, the former vice president of the Republic of China who is a member of the Democratic Progressive Party, also protested against this, arguing that "the joint signature must be accompanied by a copy of the ID card to amend the law." This is to raise the threshold of the referendum, and the referendum cannot reach the threshold of 5 million votes without tying the general election. (2) (3)

However, the fact-checking center said that the DPP government did not increase the threshold, and that Tsai Ing-wen's confiscation of the referendum was inconsistent with the information checked. Such false fact-checking is blatantly defending the current administration.

Q13 Han Guoyu: "Thank you President Tsai Ing-wen for your question, I think I'm open-minded. I'm sorry, I don't dare to look at it, and I don't dare to think that your structure is too small, I can only say that you are too small to help you write the script reader. , three political meetings, digging for oil on my Taiping Island, about my family affairs, to the Ferris wheel, today to the issue of Kaohsiung... From digging oil on Taiping Island, to my family affairs, to the Ferris wheel, to Kaohsiung The question of the city, I am sometimes confused, who provided you with this information?" Has Han Kuo-yu ever mentioned "Taiping Island digging for oil"?

However, if we look at this dialogue again, we will find that Han Guoyu did not deny that he had mentioned the words "Petroleum digging on Taiping Island" in this dialogue. However, the fact-checking center believes that Han Guoyu's statement is denying that he has said "Peace Island digs for oil" and believes that Han Guoyu's remarks are inconsistent with past facts. This is not a target to hit by yourself, what is it?

Relatedly, on September 23, 2008, Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu attended the Kaohsiung City Council's "Annual 109 Kaohsiung City General Budget Preparation Situation Briefing", responding to DPP member Gao Minlin's concern about "Taiping Island digging for oil". "When the topic is used, "Who said that when you dig for oil? Let me make this clear today", "Do I have a black and white letter?" The response caused controversy. Afterwards, the Kaohsiung City Government responded to Han Guoyu that he never said that the Taiping Island should be developed by the Kaohsiung City Government to dig oil. He means that with the consent of the central government and the consent of neighboring countries, Kaohsiung City will benefit from taxation. (1)

The fact-checking center mentioned the controversy that had been clarified in September again and forcibly linked this controversy to the content of the presidential debate. It is against the self-conduct of the media and highlights the fact-checking center's neutral and biased position.

1https://www.youtube.com/watch?v= wcGuIxTxTZg

Q17 Tsai Ing-wen: "During this election process, Mayor Han and the Kuomintang liked to criticize me for saying 'this country'. In fact, when I said 'this country', I wanted to remind them not to focus on 'that country'. Mayor Han was asked When it comes to which country most endangers Taiwan's security, the first thing I do is hesitant to say the name of that country, and I tell you, that country is China"?

The fact-checking center believes that it matches the information checked.

However, we re-read President Tsai Ing-wen's speech, please note that she used the word "dare not" instead of "unwilling". When Bohn asked "Which country poses the greatest threat to Taiwan", Han Kuo-yu clearly pointed out that the greatest threat to Taiwan is the People's Liberation Army of the Chinese Communist Party. The National Army has used the People's Liberation Army as an imaginary enemy for decades. This paragraph of speech is enough to show that Han Guoyu is not afraid to say the name of that country. The reason why Han Guoyu is reluctant to say the word "China" is that according to the Constitution of the Republic of China, both sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to one China, and China refers to the Republic of China. The People's Republic of China called on the other side has never been recognized by the Republic of China, and is only called the mainland area according to the Cross-Strait Relations Regulations. As a Republic of China faction, Han Guoyu naturally holds a position of supporting the Republic of China and the Constitution of the Republic of China. Of course, he is not willing to make a speech that violates the constitutional framework and call the other side China. President Tsai Ing-wen's statement that Mayor Han Kuo-yu dare not speak of China is untrue.

The fact-checking center deems Tsai Ing-wen's untrue speculation about Han Kuo-yu as an extremely obvious mistake, which severely damages her own credibility.

Controversial part

Q2 Han Guoyu: "DPP legislators go to the mainland to drink, do you have to sing this song? After singing, you start to scold others! You actually sang "We Are All Family"?

The Fact-Checking Center believes that the findings are partially inconsistent with the data. The evidence it gave was reported by China Times Electronic Newspaper and China Review Network.

According to the China Review News Agency, "At this time, Liu Shengliang, the former 'legislator' of the Kuomintang, stood in front of the stage and sang "We are all one family". It is a family. It was a family in the past, and it is a family now. Qiu Chuizhen said that he knew that the treasure song was finally coming out. Said that the Chinese nation is divided into the "Republic of China" and the People's Republic of China. They are like brothers and sisters and help each other. You support me, I support you, and fight each other. Qiu Chuizhen said that brothers in the same family are separated, just like brothers climbing mountains and working hard. Don't worry about their own development. As for the future two, will they be integrated into one? The split will be combined, and whether the two will be integrated into one family will be left to the next generation to decide, so as not to hurt the feelings of brothers."

However, click on the link given by the fact-checking center, and the review is exclusive: red, blue and green are singing and dancing in Beijing, and there is absolutely no such content in it. This is incredible. After inquiries, the relevant content came from an article on Dagong.com. The song "High Mountain Green" dances with red, blue and green "Compatriots on both sides of the Strait are brothers and sisters." This article mentioned that former legislator Liu Shengliang sang that we are all a family, but it did not mention whether Qiu Chuizhen, who was wearing a guitar, joined the chorus or accompanies the song. Moreover, although this report claims to be from China Review Network, it contains a lot of content that is not in the link given by the fact-checking center, and its credibility is questionable.

The fact-checking center's assertion that the DPP legislators did not sing that we are a family based on unclear data is far from the cautious spirit of fact-checking. And the wrong link it gave also exposed its unprofessional side.

A song "High Mountain Green" red, blue and green dance together "Compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan Strait are brothers and sisters" http://news.takungpao.com.hk/taiwan/liangan/2013-06/1660249.html

China Review Exclusive: Red, Blue and Green sing and dance in Beijing http://www.crntt.tw/crn-webapp/doc/docDetailCreate.jsp?coluid=93&kindid=8110&docid=102560937&mdate=0601000948

Q5 Tsai Ing-wen: "The 1992 Consensus, there is no Republic of China"?

The Fact-Checking Center found it to be consistent with the data.

But first we have to ask what does this sentence mean? If this sentence means that the word "Republic of China" is not included in the 1992 Consensus, it is indeed consistent with the data. But if this sentence is to say that the 1992 Consensus has nothing to do with the Republic of China, without the participation of the Republic of China, then this sentence is a big mistake. Therefore, I have to ask President Tsai Ing-wen to clarify the meaning of this sentence. Until she makes it clear, the fact-checking center is not qualified to determine the meaning of this sentence and say it is consistent with the data. What's the difference between such a rash move and a cheerleader fan on the sidelines defending his idol?

Q11 Han Guoyu: "On August 4, 1989, President Tsai Ing-wen, you personally replied that a China may be a system in which the two sides of the strait share common prosperity in the next five years, ten years, or even longer." You are the chairman of the MAC, you answer questions in the Legislative Yuan, and the annual report of the MAC is all there. A China in the future is the only choice for Taiwanese. Do you forget or are you afraid to remember?”

The Fact Checking Center found it inconsistent with the original statement.

However, the Fact Checking Center only checked the previous sentence "One China may be the next five or ten years, or even longer, a system for mutual prosperity of both sides of the Taiwan Strait" and found that Tsai Ing-wen's statement was simplified, and did not mention it at all. And the second half of "A China in the future is the only choice for Taiwanese". Does this sentence match Tsai Ing-wen's original statement?

According to a report in the United Daily News on August 4, 2000, Tsai Ing-wen pointed out that "but in fact, the people of Taiwan have only one choice, which is to build a meaningful political relationship with the mainland." What does Tsai Ing-wen mean by a meaningful political relationship? See previous article "Tsai Ing-wen pointed out that, based on the proximity of culture and economy, the people of Taiwan have only one option for the future, which is to build a meaningful political relationship with mainland China, a system of coexistence and co-prosperity in the next five to ten years, simplified It is "one China in the future"." We can see that Tsai Ing-wen's meaningful political relationship really refers to "one China in the future". Therefore, it is in line with the original intention to say that "one China in the future is the only choice for the Taiwanese people".

For some reason, the fact-checking center only checked the first half of the sentence and ignored the second half of the sentence, but listed the two sentences together and gave a conclusion that "does not match the original statement". It is suspected of confusion.

the second part

Q1 Tsai Ing-wen (about 6:15 in the first stage of the application) "After reading the first three political meetings and the application of Mayor Han just now, I believe that not only me, but the majority of people in Taiwan, are interested in the decision of Mayor Han. After hearing about concrete and feasible policies and political opinions, I have given up any hope. After the political opinions of the first three sessions, I explained to all my compatriots the conditions of the head of state, the development of cross-strait relations, the current situation of energy transition, and the regional balance. The results of the judicial reform, the construction of the social care system, the strengthening of the social safety net, the assistance to the socially disadvantaged, and the major goal of national economic development. Compared with Mayor Han, he has only one political opinion, which is to restore the special investigation team. ”

After investigation: [inconsistent with the information searched]

Taking the third political meeting as an example, in addition to the special investigation team, Korean Yu also mentioned

Common People Fund Hope Project (see the second round)

I attach great importance to the economy of the common people. I hope that in the future, we can set up the Hope Project for the common people's economy of about 100 billion yuan. Set up a common people's economic service group to help these common people's economic friends.

60% salary for unpaid leave (see second round)

Therefore, for all friends on unpaid leave in the future, when Han Guoyu becomes president, we will revise the law to ensure that you can get at least 60% of your salary and salary, so that you can support your family, not that you have no money on unpaid leave. can receive.

Self-raised superannuation (see second round)

Third, in the future, we will cash out, so that all young friends have a "self-raised pension". You contribute 3% every month, the government contributes 3% for you, we save it, and then save the money, and the employer also contributes about 3%. We can talk about it when the time comes, and the money will follow you personally and follow you for the rest of your life. After this goes on, the government will allocate about 10,800 yuan a year to each worker friend who earns less than 30,000 yuan to help the worker friend.

It can be seen that in the second round of speeches at the third political meeting, the mayors of China and South Korea put forward three specific political opinions. President Tsai Ing-wen's accusations are untrue.

Q2 Tsai Ing-wen (about 2:15 in the first stage of the discussion) "Second, China is using the 1992 consensus to hollow out the Republic of China, so we must defend our sovereignty more firmly."

After investigation: [The statement does not provide evidence]

In the debate, Tsai Ing-wen mentioned that China used the 1992 Consensus to hollow out the Republic of China, but did not provide relevant evidence or arguments.

Q3 Tsai Ing-wen (the first question of the second stage of the media question) "As for the matter of national shipbuilding, every time we talk about national shipbuilding and national defense, our mayor Han will talk about the fraud. I want to remind you again. , the Qing Fu case happened during the Ma Ying-jeou government, not when I was in power, please clarify this fact.”

After investigation: [inconsistent with the part of the information searched]

The Qing father case is a case that spanned the era of Ma Ying-jeou and Tsai Ing-wen, not just in the era of Ma Ying-jeou

Citations from the Fact Checking Center

2. The minehunter procurement case has been implemented since 2010. Qingfu Shipyard won the bid in 2013. Chen Qingnan and Chen Zhiwei and their sons defrauded banks and related companies from November 2014 to May 2016. The period spanned the reigns of Ma Ying-jeou and Tsai Ing-wen, and it cannot be inferred that the Qing Fu case was because "Tsai Ing-wen used too many corrupt officials."

Q4 Tsai Ing-wen (the third question of the second stage of media questions) "As for the matter of the Supervisory Committee, I have already said that no matter who is in power or who is nominated by the Supervisory Committee, the Supervisory Committee will investigate the judicial officer. Then I will also As I said, this is a dispute between two agencies that exercise their powers independently. This is not a dispute that the president can intervene in. This is an agency that exercises its powers independently. They can draw it out through consultation and coordination mechanisms. That line, the powers they exercise independently, will not collide with each other."

After investigation: [inconsistent with the information searched]

The President of the Republic of China has the responsibility of coordinating the resolution of disputes among the five chambers

According to Article 44 of the Constitution of the Republic of China

Except as provided in this Constitution, the President may convene the presidents of the relevant chambers to resolve disputes between the chambers.

The President has every right to intervene in disputes between the Judicial Yuan and the Supervisory Yuan.

Q5 Tsai Ing-wen (the fourth question in the second stage of media questions) Thank you, the host. I just heard Mayor Han categorically say that he does not accept one country, two systems, but when Xi Jinping first started talking about the 1992 consensus on one country, two systems, Mayor Han replied that he didn't know, he hesitated, and even in March, he was still there. The Liaison Office of the People's Republic of China will visit to create an atmosphere of one country, two systems. "

After investigation: [inconsistent with the information investigated, and the inference is too simplified]

Mayor Han clearly pointed out that the 1992 Consensus is not one country, two systems, and it is not clear that he faltered. Participating in cross-strait exchanges is something that both major political parties in Taiwan are involved in. It is impossible to launch a visit to the Liaison Office to create an atmosphere of one country, two systems.

On January 8, 2019, in response to Xi's five points, Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen re-emphasized today (8th) that the Taiwanese people oppose one country, two systems, which is already the common position of the ruling and opposition parties. This is the most important Taiwan consensus in 2019.

On January 17, 2019, Chen Zhizhong, the son of former President Chen Shui-bian and Kaohsiung City Councilor of the Democratic Progressive Party, asked Han Guoyu in the morning, what is the specific content of the 1992 consensus? Han Guoyu stressed that the 1992 consensus is not one country, two systems.

On March 29, 2019, Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu went to the Kaohsiung City Council today to meet with various political groups. He did not respond much to Chen Mingtong, the chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council, who asked him to report his trip to the mainland, but he said that Taiwan cannot accept one country, two systems.

It can be seen that President Tsai Ing-wen said in early January this year that opposing one country, two systems is the consensus of the ruling and opposition parties. Mayor Han belongs to the Chinese Kuomintang and holds the same position as the Kuomintang on cross-strait issues. He has also repeatedly expressed his opposition to one country, two systems. President Tsai Ing-wen clearly knew his position and still questioned Han Kuo-yu at the debate, saying "I don't know" is inconsistent with the information we have checked.

Q6 Tsai Ing-wen (interrogation in the third stage) "Just now Mayor Han talked about the Kaohsiung election. I think the Kaohsiung City election. Mayor Han should have intervened in our election at that time. Many forces operating on the Internet have given us Mayor Han the greatest help, and you should be the biggest beneficiary of the Internet Army.”

After investigation: [The statement does not provide evidence]

President Tsai Ing-wen accuses China's cyber army of meddling in Kaohsiung's election last year but has offered no evidence at all

Q7 Tsai Ing-wen (Cross-examination in the third stage) Mayor Han once signed a proposal called Colorless Awakening. It is said that Taiwanese are Chinese, and you are willing to discuss with an open mind the steps and models of reunification acceptable to people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait in the future. Mayor Han, isn't this acknowledging that Taiwan is part of China? So can the Republic of China still live long?

After investigation: [The inference cannot be deduced]

According to Article 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of China, the territory of the Republic of China shall not be changed in accordance with its inherent territory without a resolution of the National Assembly. In other words, both sides of the Taiwan Strait belong to the Republic of China. Those who have the nationality of the Republic of China in accordance with Article 3 of the Constitution are nationals of the Republic of China. In other words, Taiwanese are also nationals of the Republic of China and are Chinese. Mayor Han's speech is completely in accordance with the constitution, and the inability to make a speech in accordance with the constitution of the Republic of China will make the Republic of China not long live.

Q8 Tsai Ing-wen (cross-examination in the third stage) "The special investigation team, as we said earlier, became a method used by politicians to liquidate political enemies in the era of Mawang's political dispute. To use the same method to set up a special investigation team to investigate your baseless accusations is the worst example of a politician: meddling with justice and using justice as a tool of political struggle."

After investigation: [The statement does not provide evidence]

illustrate

In 2013, the special investigation team overheard Ke Jianming and Legislative President Wang Jinping's voices that were suspected to be Guan Said. Because of the importance of the matter, the Attorney General Huang Shiming stipulated in accordance with Article 44 of the Constitution, "The president may convene the presidents of the relevant courts to resolve disputes between the courts, except as provided in this Constitution." The President presents the report. The Supervisory Yuan impeached Huang Shiming twice but failed. Huang Shiming was sentenced to one year and three months in prison for leaking secrets after his retirement. The involved Ma Ying-jeou, Wang Jinping, and Ke Jianming were not sentenced.

Q9 Tsai Ing-wen (cross-examination in the third stage) "You need to know how these Internet soldiers are fake and smeared on the Internet, and they even bully many of our politicians. They are not even politicians. They are just opinion leaders. He is not even an opinion leader, he is just a very simple citizen who expresses his opinions and will be bullied. Have you ever heard that Qiu Yiying's Facebook was washed by millions of people because he expressed a position. How serious is this? matter."

After investigation: [inconsistent with the information searched]

Commissioner Qiu Yiying's Facebook was bombed not because she expressed a position, but because her "sleeping" and "sex Ferris wheel" smears caused public outrage. On October 28, Qiu Yiying's speech in a line group was exposed.

"Open a casino? Dig for oil? Drive a sex Ferris wheel? Or send Taiwan directly to China? All wise seniors... Think about it calmly! Do you want to teach your children to go to a casino to make a fortune? You want yours Does your wife make Han Guoyu sleep for one night as a reward for your job offer? Do you want this city to be nothing but gambling and sex?"

Obviously, this is not a mere difference of position but a pure smear.

Netizens were also quite dissatisfied with Qiu Yiying's statement that "messages are all robots", leaving messages one after another.

"I'm not a robot, I'm a citizen of the Republic of China with flesh and blood and the right to vote", "Everyone who speaks here has an ID on Facebook... A bunch of brain-dead DPP... and robot AI!", "I'm not a robot, so Qiu Yiying is again helping Han Kuo-yu canvassing votes." "Please some legislators don't treat the people as idiots."

https://www.ettoday.net/news/20181028/1292481.htm

https://www.chinatimes.com/realtimenews/20181105002146-260407?chdtv

Q10 Tsai Ing-wen (cross-examination in the third stage) "Okay, Mayor Han, your national affairs advisory group put forward the 2035 plan, I don't know if you have seen it. You know that your own energy ratio will be used in the 2035 energy plan. How much nuclear power?

I have calculated for you. In your plan, nuclear energy should account for 25%, far more than the current 10%.

Therefore, not only the nuclear four that President Ma has sealed will be restarted, but also nuclear five and six. "

After investigation: [inconsistent with the information searched]

After verification, on July 3, at the Kuomintang primary election political meeting, South Korea Yu proposed the 2035 plan.

The final stage of the National Political Vision TV Conference for the KMT presidential primary election was held in Taipei today (3rd) evening. Regarding the energy issue, Kaohsiung Mayor Han Kuo-yu said that the 2025 non-nuclear homeland plan proposed by the DPP was a scam that cost a lot of money. "2035, 5050 plan", it is hoped that by 2035, Taiwan's entire carbon emissions will account for 50% of the electricity distribution, and the other 50% will use clean energy.

Han Guoyu only said that there should be 50% clean energy, but did not say the specific proportion of nuclear energy. The Korean camp also responded today

"Environmental Information Center" interviewed Vice Presidential candidate Zhang Shanzheng for verification after today's debate. Zhang Shanzheng said, "In 2035, nuclear energy will add 50% of renewable energy. We wrote here. We don't have a crystal ball to see that in 2035, nuclear energy will reach 25%. This is what Tsai Ing-wen helped us invent." Zhang Shanzheng added, with His expectations for technology, "The renewable energy will be 25% to 30% by then, which shows that Tsai Ing-wen has no confidence in his own renewable energy. I don't think it will only be 25% by then."

https://tw.news.yahoo.com/Korean camp-never said nuclear power should be 25 in 2035-but renewable energy should be able 25-30-132014964.html