Taiwan’s newspaper, United Daily News (UDN) faces accusation from China policy and security policy expert Bonnie Glaser for their deliberately misleading headline on the “1992 consensus”. UDN published an article on September 11 stating that Glaser was urging Democratic Progressive Party presidential candidate Tsai Ing-wen to accept the ostensible “1992 consensus” and “one China policy”.
Glaser attended a panel discussion at a conference called “Cross-Strait Series: The Upcoming Taiwanese Elections” which is sponsored by the Atlantic Council on September 9. At the conference, she said in order to achieve the preservation of cross-strait stability, Chinese president Xi Jinping might say this to US President Barack Obama, “There must be acceptance by Taiwan’s next president of the 1992 consensus and more importantly, one China.” However, the headlines in UDN presented her speech incorrectly and this article has been used by other Taiwanese media to question both parties’ presidential candidates. Glaser, a senior adviser for Asia at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said that UDN’s editors in Taipei “deliberately created a headline to mislead readers to think that I personally urged Tsai Ing-wen to accept the 1992 consensus and one China.”
“This is not the first time that some Taiwanese media have distorted my statements to support their political agenda,” Glaser said. “I am an independent American scholar and I do not want to be a pawn in Taiwan’s politics, especially during the election season.”
The mistake made by UDN has created some heated discussion on the internet. It caught more people’s attention when Glaser responded the revised article of UDN on the chief editor of Thinking Taiwan J. Michael Cole‘s Facebook page. She said despite UDN has revised the article, the damage is done. “In the absence of a cost, UDN will continue this practice,” wrote Glaser. Cole asked Glaser if she wants to file a lawsuit against UDN, she is “all for it” and asked Cole to put her in touch with a lawyer.
UDN published an apology on September 13, stating that there was no mistake or misleading content in their article but they apologize for the imprecise headline.