As a matter of fact, Matthews was made a propagandist for Castro, but the important point we wish to make is that Ambassador Gardner and President Batista did not try to interfere with the reporter's freedom of access to news sources.

Edgar Snow was given such freedom to write about Mao Zedong in Yenan as an agrarian reformer during the Second World War. Chiang Kai-shek, who did what he could to destroy Mao in vain, did not stop the American journalist from interviewing the man who later styled himself as the Great Helmsman of China. Of course, Snow was duped like Matthews.

But a Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmaker, who perhaps doesn't know what freedom of the press is, is trying to prevent Radio Taiwan International (RTI) from interviewing a number of Communist leaders in Beijing. Chen Ting-chi, a woman legislator, took the administration to task the other day for subsidizing RTI, a national broadcasting station which she alleged is directing Chinese Communist propaganda at the people of Taiwan. RTI, she insisted, should propagandize Taiwan's government policies, rather than acting as a propagandist for the People's Republic. She worked herself up to such a pitch as to tear a page out of the annual budget estimate of the Government Information Office (GIO) on which she was supposed to deliberate at a Legislative Yuan committee meeting. She didn't give Su Jun-bin, GIO director-general, a chance to answer her diatribe of questions. She charged the government with “currying favor” with the Chinese leaders by letting RTI air exclusive interviews.

Su told the press after his encounter with the lawmaker that the GIO cannot tell RTI, or any other government-supported national media for that matter, what to do or what not to do. The only guidelines for them, he pointed out, are to maintain their independence and uphold the dignity of the country. The guidelines have to be followed by all media as well, of course.

Has any Chinese media in Taipei asked for an interview with President Ma Ying-jeou?

Some have, Su said. But President Ma hasn't granted any such interview, albeit he has been interviewed exclusively by domestic media on an all-but-rotation basis. Some Chinese media, including the --inhua News Agency, have made requests to interview not just President Ma, but other government leaders, and attend news conferences or briefings, Su told reporters. No interviews have been granted, he added, but reporters from China are able to take part in press meetings. “In the future, interviews may be arranged,” he conceded. Incidentally, --inhua correspondents said they haven't submitted any request to interview President Ma.

Why not?

There is nothing wrong with RTI interviewing Chinese leaders. Its correspondents are not playing toady for Beijing. They are acting as independent press workers reporting what Chinese leaders plan to do to further improve relations between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. They are neither Matthewses nor Snows. We truly wish the pro-independence opposition legislator would have faith in Taiwan's practicing journalists who may have professional opinions different from hers.

To be honest, Taiwan's reporters in Beijing should be encouraged to interview Chinese leaders. That is one way to help quench the burning hatred of Taiwan's independence activists for China. Without a better mutual understanding, there can be no lasting peace across the Strait, which even hardcore independence supporters wish will prevail.

On the other hand, Taiwan's political leaders from President Ma on down, and including those of the opposition party, should meet and talk with Chinese media representatives in Taipei. No restrictions should be placed on whom they can or cannot interview. Don't forget the previous DPP administration allowed Chinese media to be represented in Taipei. There is no reason why Taiwan allows in Chinese reporters and forbids them to interview its leading politicians. That is an encroachment on their freedom of access to news sources any democracy should try to avoid.