Sunday, 8 February 2015

Reader Response Draft 2

In the article “Where ISN’T social media ubiquitous?”, Levi (2012) suggests that not every part of theworld is bitten by the social media bug.  This is clearly evident in areas where the access to Internet is scarce, such as undeveloped areas or regions facing political instability. In addition, Levi adds that the unavailability of languages contribute to the lack of prevalence, though the problem is lessen by the availability of second languages. To avoid any political complications, the author highlights that Facebook has intentionally omitted some languages, such as Taiwanese and Tibetan.

The strained relationship between Taiwan and China began as early as 1949, when Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalists lost the civil war to Mao Zedong's Communist forces, which then "sets up government-in-exile on Taiwan" (Murdoch & Richardson, 2008). Throughout the years, the two countries' relationship was never settled on a peaceful note. As such, I do agree with the author that it was necessary for social media sites to deliberately exclude Taiwanese as a language on its platform.

On Mar 8, 2008, China released details of the planned new anti-secession bill during its annual session of parliament. The bill stressed that any attempt of secession by the Taiwanese government will result in an initiation of war, something which Wang Zhaoguo, vice-chairman of the National People's Congress (NPC) said that China was prepared for. In addition, it was later announced that Beijing’s arms budget would increase by 12.6% in that year (Labott .E, Grant, S. & Duffy, T., 2014). The strong emphasis of a possible war breakout by China had prevented Taiwan from trying any means of declaring independence. By introducing Taiwanese as an option in the ‘language selection’, it may suggest that social media sites are supporting Taiwan’s proposition of autonomy.

Taiwan had also began to accept the use of hanyu pinyin since more than five years ago (The Economist, 2014). Both its president, Mr Ma Ying-jeou, and officials supported the use of this phonetic system and agreed it would improve Taiwan’s economic situation with other Chinese-speaking regions.

However, this view was not shared amongst the rest of the country. The Economist (2014) reported that major cities of the country insisted on using the former Romanization system, which was introduced in 2002. Therefore, Facebook’s implementation of the Taiwanese language may insinuate the view of the opposition parties, and aggravate relations domestically as well as internationally, between Taiwan and China. As such, the omission of the language by social media sites would prevent any political problems.

Despite all the negative effects social media sites might create upon the official release of the Taiwanese language, it does not mean that they should exclude this possibility as an area of development. In the article "Taiwan stays on course for closer ties with mainland China", Chung (2015) noted that Wang Yu-chi, the chairman of the Mainland Affairs Council, which oversees policies towards the mainland, said that one of the government's goals this year was to engage in further talks with Beijing. Chung also mentioned that recent polls have revealed that 80 per cent of the Taiwanese public supports the idea of fostering closer ties with mainland China. According to CCTV (2014), Taiwanese have been patronizing the China-based online store, Taobao, for both commercial and individual use. As such, social media sites that advertise Taobao could use this opportunity to increase Taiwanese users by supporting their native language on their platform. This may then increase the economic trade activities between the two countries, and hence, supports the Taiwanese government’s goal of building closer ties with China.
                      

(591 words)



References:


CCTV (2014). Taobao's popularity in the Taiwan region. [Online Video]. Available from http://english.cntv.cn/program/bizasiaamerica/20140213/102487.shtml
Chung, L. (2015). Taiwan stays on course for closer ties with mainland China. Retrieved from http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1689369/taiwan-stays-course-closer-ties-mainland-china
Labott .E, Grant, S. & Duffy, T. (2014). U.S urges China to rethink Taiwan  Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/03/07/china.npc.law/
Levi, D. (2012, July 24). Where ISN'T social media ubiquitous? [Web log post].Retrieved from http://www.etondigital.com/where-isnt-social-media-ubiquitous/
Murdoch, G. & Richardson, A. (2008). TIMELINE: Milestones in China-Taiwan relations since 1949. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/06/12/uk-china-taiwan-idUSSP28081420080612

The Economist (2014). Lost in Romanisation. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21603500-ideological-warfare-over-spelling-lost-romanisation?zid=306&ah=1b164dbd43b0cb27ba0d4c3b12a5e227

The Economist (2014). Strait of alarm. [Online Video]. Available from http://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2014/03/taiwans-relations-china?zid=306&ah=1b164dbd43b0cb27ba0d4c3b12a5e227#

3 comments:

  1. Ello!

    Overall organisation of the response is clear. Transition between paragraphs are done in an logical manner where each paragraph presents a new point that you are trying to convey.

    We feel that it might be better to start your second paragraph with your thesis statement because the content of your reader response is focused solely on an example of the original article. The main point that you are trying to argue is that certain languages (in your response, its Taiwanese) should be omitted from social media platforms. From there you can start to focus and elaborate on your main opinions on the Taiwan-China issue.

    However, this is a very factual response and we feel that you can do more in analysing the **FACTS** to support your claim.

    We like your research but please do proper citations *wink*

    No language issues.

    Asyraf, Chuye and Elaine

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jovyn,

    Citations:
    Since there are no authors for The Economist articles, the citation should be like so:
    Lost in Romanisation. (2014) [i]The Economist.[/i] Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/news/asia/21603500-ideological-warfare-over-spelling-lost-romanisation?zid=306&ah=1b164dbd43b0cb27ba0d4c3b12a5e227.

    Content:
    We feel that your reader response has no thesis. Rather than being an argumentative essay, it seems more descriptive.

    You have given us a history of China and Taiwan, but we feel that it is abrupt to jump from history to language in your third paragraph.

    Popular social media sites like Facebook, which included Taiwan's traditional Chinese in their language selection, are banned in China. Perhaps you could have looked into the reasons why these social media sites are not "ubiquitous".

    For the third and second last paragraph, the focus of it is not clear. Who is the country? (2nd last paragraph) Is it inferred to be Taiwan? Also there was no clear direction and link for those two paragraphs as to what you are trying to argue. Which are the opposition parties and what are they fighting for? It requires more elaboration and linkages. The link between the paragraph is not established, 2nd last paragraph is on government decision but the third is about the people?

    In the last paragraph, you mentioned that Taiwanese wants closer ties with mainland China, but it was not established how taobao helps foster closer ties. Would these ties be genuine or would it be strictly economic?

    You could also add a short conclusion by reiterating your stand and the main ideas.

    Guoxiong and Paulette

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thank you, Jovyn, for this effort. Your initial summary seems quite effective and accurate. As your peers have noted though, the response has some weaknesses. For one, even while your content is well researched, the connection between your discussion of the Taiwan issue and Levi's article doesn't come through strongly enough. That may be because of the lack of a clear thesis. There is no need for you to write an argumentative essay, because this is a reader response. Still, there needs to be more response to the original reading and its content. That implies the need to tie the China-Taiwan issue more closely to the social media thrust of Levi's discussion.

    Your peers have given lots of good feedback as well. Take note of their comments and one when you rewrite this.

    ReplyDelete