The TT has published a bizarre side by side of a CNA article and the TT’s edited version.
We are not told what CNA took exception to in the editing nor are we told why the TT felt it “appropriate” to publish both versions.
Aside from the TT being petty and unprofessional, this is the first time since the paper launched that this has been done.
This is certainly not about the TT trying to show the world that its editing is laudatory; so what is the political element?
Who at the paper commanded that this be published?
Weird!
Link?
It’s in today’s TT on page 2. Very strange. It seems to be that the TT didn’t like the objectivity in the CNA report, and so “embellished” it with some interesting “factoids” some of which might or might not be true and some of which – like the so-called “unconstitutional” 2nd truth commission – seem to be outright lies (the 2nd truth commission has of course NOT been ruled unconstitutional).
The stench of a shady Sanchung builder is reeking off this story.
What prompted the CNA to complain is that the TT failed to change the attribution – i.e. the paper’s nonsensical editing and lies are attributed to the fine upstanding pillars of the community that comprise the CNA.
Outrage! I tell you, OUTRAGE!
Link? The missing link?
There is nothing on the TT Web site, as it seems that the paper that professes to “bring Taiwan to the world” does not want this matter to be widely known outside Taiwan.
(I have my suspicions as to what is going on here, but will first let those who wish to weigh in.)
Under a heading of “Editor’s note,” the TT says: “The state-funded Central News Agency has taken exception to the editing of a story that appeared in yesterday’s edition titled (sic) “KMT sues police agency chief over 319 shooting.” The “Taipei Times” considers it appropriate to publish the original unedited CNA version alongside the “Taipei Times” verson for readers to compare (sic)”
CNA VERSION:
POLICE CHIEF, PROSECUTORS CHARGED WITH DESTROYING EVIDENCE
2006-08-28 16:58:25
Taipei, Aug. 28 (CNA) The legislative caucus of the opposition Kuomintang (KMT) filed a lawsuit against National Police Agency (NPA) Director-General Hou You-yi and three Tainan prosecutors Monday, charging them with dereliction of duty and destroying evidence in connection with the March 19, 2004 shooting of President Chen Shui-bian and Vice President Annette Lu.
Tsai Chin-lung, caucus secretary-general, said the charges were based on a report of the legislature's special committee investigating the shooting, a case that the government had closed after blaming it on a lone alleged shooter named Chen Yi-hsiung.
Chen was found dead 10 days after the incident in Tainan, the city where the incident took place. His family has raised questions concerning his death and has accused police investigators of forcing them to give false testimonies.
Lawyer Sun Yu-hui, acting on behalf of the KMT caucus, quoted the special committee's report, which was published Aug. 22, as raising four major points of suspicion concerning the police probe and prosecution of the case: -- The National Security Bureau (NSB) on March 18, 2004 had information that an attempt to assassinate the president might be in the offing, information that security officers like Hou knew and yet failed to pursue. -- The bullets found in the jeep in which the president and the vice president were shot at and those found at Chi Mei Hospital where the two were treated were of different caliber and therefore could not be determined to have been fired from the same pistol. -- The pants and underwear that the president wore on that day did not have any gunshot holes or bloodstains, but Hou and the investigators he led ignored and hid this critical piece of evidence, a move that can be seen as "misleading the direction" of the investigation. -- Hou and his investigative team deliberately adopted the strategy of using the bullets to trace the gun and using the gun to trace its owner, without ever attempting to find evidence to prove that the shooting could have been a "self-directed" drama, concluding that Chen Yi-hsiung was the only suspect and closing the case based on this sloppy conclusion.
In fact, Sun quoted the report as pointing out, many questions remain with regard to Chen's death, further indicating that Hou and his team did not try to seek the truth about the shooting.
Hou at the time was the criminal police chief. He was later promoted to his current position.
Also being sued are Tainan District Prosecutor's Office Chief Prosecutor Liu Wei-tzung, as well as prosecutors Wang Sen-jung and Kuo Chen-ni, who was spokeswoman for the special investigative team.
Sun said these four officials are suspected of having committed the offenses of malfeasance and destroying evidence. Under the criminal code, they could be sentenced heavily if found guilty, Sun added.
Hou would not respond to the accusation except to say he had asked the Criminal Investigation Bureau to give "professional" answers to the legislative committee's questions.
EDITED VERSION BY TAIPEI TIMES (sic):
KMT sues police agency chief over 319 shooting
CNA WITH STAFF WRITER , TAIPEI
Tuesday, Aug 29, 2006,Page 3
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislative caucus filed a lawsuit against National Police Agency Director-General Hou You-yi (侯友宜) and three Tainan prosecutors yesterday, charging them with dereliction of duty and destroying evidence in connection with the March 19, 2004, shooting of President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and Vice President Annette Lu (呂秀蓮).
Tsai Chin-lung (蔡錦隆), caucus secretary-general, said the charges were based on a report of the 319 Shooting Truth Investigation Special Committee – a partisan committee that was ruled unconstitutional by the Council of Grand Justices.
The case was closed by authorities after they identified the shooter as Chen Yi-hsiung (陳義雄), a lone, mentally disturbed, unemployed man who blamed his financial problems on the president.
Chen Yi-hsiung was found dead 10 days after the incident in Tainan, the city where the incident took place. After initially supporting the government’s conclusion that Chen Yi-hsiung was the shooter, members of his family later raised questions concerning his death, and in a press conference organized by the KMT, accused police investigators of forcing them to give false testimonies.
Lawyer Sun Yu-hui (孫煜輝), acting on behalf of the KMT caucus, quoted a report by the illegal committee that was published on Aug. 22, as raising what he described as four major points of suspicion concerning the police probe and prosecution of the case:
First, that the National Security Bureau on March 18, 2004, had information that an attempt to assassinate the president might be in the offing, information that the report said security officers like Hou knew and yet failed to pursue.
Second, the homemade bullets found in the Jeep in which the president and the vice president were shot and those found at Chi Mei Hospital where the two were treated were of slightly different calibers, and therefore the report said they could not be determined to have been fired from the same pistol.
Third, the pants and underwear the president wore on that day did not have any gunshot holes or bloodstains, and the report said Hou and the investigators he led ignored and hid this critical piece of evidence.
Fourth, the report said that Hou and his investigative team used the bullets to trace the gun and used the gun to trace its owner, instead of attempting to find evidence to prove that the shooting could have been staged.
Sun quoted the report as saying that many questions remain over Chen Yi-hsiung’s death, further indicating that Hou and his team did not try to seek the truth behind the shooting.
Also being sued are Tainan District Prosecutors’ Office Chief Prosecutor Liu Wei-tzung (劉惟宗), as well as prosecutors Wang Sen-jung (王森榮) and Kuo Chen-ni (郭珍妮), who was spokeswoman for the special investigative team.
Sun said the four officials are accused of committing the offenses of malfeasance and destroying evidence.
Under the criminal code, they could be sentenced heavily if found guilty, Sun added.
How can one destroy evidence of a “crime” that never happened… :roflmao:
As an aside, the TT, one the one hand, seems to be trying to show that its editors can, in fact, edit.
I believe that I am not the only one who can say that the TT is hardly the media outlet to be showing off to anyone on how good its editing is.
I remember reading a Guardian piece in the TT which had TT editorial insertions in square brackets in the article itself disagreeing with the article. I thought it was the most bizarre thing I had ever seen in a newspaper: Paying for syndicated copy and then inserting political comments in the article itself.
The folk at CNA don’t give a shit about what the TT prints. But they object to having their name appended to copy they didn’t produce, especially when it contains lies and conjecture such as “an illegal committee” and a shooter “described by the government as mentally disturbed.”
Make crap up if you like – it’s your paper, after all – but have the balls to admit that its yours and don’t blame your fuckups on someone else, you stupid twats.
You’d be surprised who reads the TT. When Ma Yingjiu was interviewed by the BBC the interviewer quoted the TT at him. I was astonished that the BBC would quote a zero circulation political polemic in a serious interview and you could see Ma was kind of bemused. Of course you wouldn’t expect the new journalist-free BBC to know anything about Taiwanese media.
Interestingly, I identified the two points that Sandman made myself.
The committee was not illegal; rather, it was a paper tiger without legitamacy.
As for the “mentally disturbed” comment, I also thought this was an allegation posed as fact, but as was pointed out to me, a dead man can’t be libeled (lucky for the TT – they dodged a bullet there).
However, given that the TT bylined the story, “CNA with staff writer,” I see no problem with the TT’s ignorance. I have never looked at the CNA contract, but I understand that the client can use the copy to a large extent the way it wishes.
If they had bylined the altered story as only CNA, sure, that would be wrong. However, anyone can look at the original on the CNA Web site and compare with the TT – or spend money on the hard copy of the paper. The injection of questionable material was done by the TT.
The real question here is why the TT would waste space in the paper for what is clearly an internal matter? What was the news content of this nearly quarter page? You people who bought the paper paid for that. Are you going to write in to the TT asking why this was included so dramatically in the local section?
This whole thing is a result of what happens when two Chinese “management” types decide to “Oh yeah?” “Yeah!” “Oh yeah?” “Yeah!” and one of them decides to publish it in his little vanity publication.
Pathetic…
They won’t get any sympathy from me lol. Anyway it was probably just as good as whatever else they would have printed.
I bought this paper, like I do everyday, for the crossword.
Idiocy propels me to actually read it. And while I don’t proport being a politico here, I have to admit that I was happy that TT admitted to editing the CNA. Not because they altered it to suit their own beliefs, but because at least it didn’t say “Taiwan people,” instead of Taiwanese.
[quote]This whole thing is a result of what happens when two Chinese “management” types decide to “Oh yeah?” “Yeah!” “Oh yeah?” “Yeah!” and one of them decides to publish it in his little vanity publication.
Pathetic…[/quote]
Nailed it. According to what I was told this evening, that’s EXACTLY what went down. 
Hey, I still gots it! 
Interesting too that in the newspaper, which is limited to a certain amount of content, a large chunk is devoted to the infantile jerking back and forth; however, on the Web site, which has no space limitations, the “We can too edit, you Nimrod!” does not appear.
So it wasn’t newsworthy for the rest of the world but it was for the locals who had to pay for the news? Jesus!
All I can say is if the Idiot in Chief is reading this, you have no frelling clue – best go back to school and try to get that degree.