Yaoyao Jiang’s Quick Take: Attacking Kevin Tsai, the CCP Reaps What It Sowed

Kevin Tsai attended a rally for a Taipei mayoral candidate, leading to questioning by mainland netizens and triggering brand boycotts. This article reviews Beijing's measures against Puma Shen and related organizations, and compiles cases where Taiwanese artists such as Chou Tzu-yu and Dee Hsu were besieged due to political stances, discussing how this censorship pressure impacts cross-strait exchanges and Taiwan's elections.

Video Link:

Full Text:

Hello everyone, I am Miao Jiang from Logical Verification. Kevin Tsai, who has always been humorous, witty, and seemingly harmless, recently found himself in trouble.

He attended an election rally for a Taipei mayoral candidate. "Is seeing me considered support? I want to listen and hear opinions right away, can it be finished with applause too? But if there is a chance, it would be great to interview every candidate."

At this rally, he did not go on stage to speak, nor did he publicly state whether he supported Kuo-liang. In a blink of an eye, however, he was cursed onto the trending search topics by patriotic crowds in the mainland. The cooperative car brand Leapmotor announced its dissociation overnight and took down promotional content. Even his long-cleared Weibo account was dug up and used as evidence of his being banned.

The matter is still fermenting. In a democratic society, a voter attending a candidate's rally is supposed to be the most normal thing in the world. But who on earth is this person? Why are the mainland authorities and public so wary of him? Kevin Tsai just went to listen, so how did it cause such a huge uproar? What trouble did he provoke behind this? Today we will take everyone to dig into it.

"It's just that he thought it was fun, seeing someone actually come with humor. When in a bad mood or under heavy pressure, I originally mistook it for being happy, but later many guests confessed to us afterward that they were very sad after finishing the show, very well. Right, forget it."

Kevin Tsai is a Taiwanese host and writer who studied film in the US in his early years and worked as a screenwriter and film critic after returning to Taiwan. Since 2004, he hosted the interview variety show Kangsi Coming with Dee Hsu, becoming well-known to audiences on both sides of the strait. In 2014, he also participated in the mainland debate show U Can U BB.

Yesterday, the afternoon of October 4, Democratic Progressive Party Taipei mayoral candidate Yang held a campaign headquarters establishment meeting on Beiping East Road in Taipei. Kevin Tsai was sitting in the front row of the audience, captured by the livestream camera. At that time, he was wearing a testing hat and a black mask, wearing an orange shirt, holding support props, and cheering along with the on-site atmosphere. Media called the location where he was sitting the rock zone.

Upon leaving, reporters pressed him on whether he came to support Bo-yang. He said he came to witness and wanted to hear opinions from all sides. Reporters asked again if he would go to Chiang Wan-an's event. He said if there had a chance to interview every candidate, it would be great. His agent subsequently explained that Kevin Tsai was considering interviewing the two main mayoral candidates in Taipei, so he wanted to understand their backgrounds and opinions.

When the matter reached the mainland internet, everyone had already predetermined his stance. Shen Bo-yang is a Taiwan independence element, and sitting in his audience is endorsing Taiwan independence. The discussion that followed was already about how to boycott him and make him lose his work in the mainland.

At the same time, a rumor spread that Kevin Tsai had cleared his Weibo overnight and unfollowed everyone. Seeing a blank homepage, some people assumed this was the result of Kevin Tsai being banned. In fact, as early as December 2012, media had already reported on Kevin Tsai clearing his Weibo and unfollowing accounts; yet, this action is being miscalculated today.

In this new wave of controversy, Leapmotor's distancing happened that very night. They issued a statement emphasizing their adherence to the One China principle, announced the removal of all content related to Kevin Tsai, and specifically clarified that he was not a brand ambassador for Leapmotor. The meaning of this statement is clear: they are distancing themselves from Kevin Tsai; while past cooperation existed, they want everyone to know he is not their brand ambassador. The statement further added that they would strengthen background and stance checks on partners and reserved the right to pursue legal action against relevant parties.

Meanwhile, Harper's Bazaar also took down related interviews and promotions featuring Kevin Tsai. They had originally collaborated to create content, using his popularity to attract viewers, but now that this video has circulated, they rushed to remove the content. Kevin Tsai had not even begun interviewing the mayoral candidate yet, and the car manufacturer had already panicked. One can discuss his political stance or the quality of his cars slowly, but when it comes to the political stance of a collaborating artist, one must take a stand overnight.

This controversy can be said to be very "Chinese"! Although Kevin Tsai did not express any opinions on unification or independence in mainland variety shows, even if you return to Taiwan, you cannot freely arrange your activities. Some people have turned his experience of working on programs in the mainland into a political debt: if you have earned money here, you must live in Taiwan according to our requirements. Mainland businesses that had commercial cooperation with him also seem to have bought his political choices along the way.

So, why is it that this particular event made businesses so nervous? Because the person on stage has long been labeled by Beijing as someone who cannot be touched.

"There is no one on the blacklist who wants war, but if there really is a need, I can truly do it. Then I recommend you join a 'Kuma' summer camp that is currently in full swing. Ladies and gentlemen, let us welcome the founder of the Kuma Academy, Puma Shen."

Shen was originally a scholar. He obtained a Ph.D. in Criminology in the United States and, after returning to Taiwan, taught at National Taipei University, researching criminology and China's information warfare against Taiwan. He co-founded the Kuma Academy to promote civil defense education. In 2024, he became a Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislator, which is a member of Taiwan's parliament.

Kuma Academy's public courses include first aid, evacuation, military knowledge, and identifying fake news, teaching ordinary people how to protect themselves and others during disasters or wars. For example, if someone is injured and bleeding, can the people nearby perform basic treatment before professional medical personnel arrive? When hearing an air raid siren, where should family members go? How to prepare supplies? If you receive a message on your phone saying the government has collapsed and the army has surrendered, how do you judge whether it has any basis? Ordinary people also need this knowledge.

Since the crisis, rumors and fear may be the first things to plunge society into chaos, and civil defense education lets people know what they can do, without having to sit there and wait for others to decide their fate. People have always said that Kuma Academy is also a militia organization, and asked if it is trying to provoke war, etc. But I have always wanted to tell everyone that our thinking at that time was very simple, because we will encounter various types of disasters, and of course, war is also a type of disaster. Our idea is that we must be very familiar with the threats that Taiwan will face now.

Shen's political stance is also very clear: he opposes the Chinese Communist Party's threats against Taiwan and advocates for strengthening Taiwan's defense and social resilience. Beijing, however, has lumped all these propositions into what it calls "Taiwan independence."

On October 14, 2024, the Taiwan Affairs Office announced that it had placed Shen Bo-yang and Robert Tsao on the so-called list of "diehard Taiwan independence separatists" and imposed sanctions on the Kuma Academy. The scope of the announcement involved not only these two individuals but also their family members, affiliated organizations, and corporate partners.

By June 2025, the punishment fell on a more specific area. The Taiwan Affairs Office announced that Shen Bo-yang's father, Shen Tu-cheng, served as the person in charge of Zhao Yi Co., Ltd. in Taiwan. This company has trade dealings with Chinese enterprises, so Beijing decided to prohibit this company from engaging in transactions and cooperation with organizations, enterprises, and individuals in China.

Here we can see that the methods Beijing uses have something in common with the pressure Kevin Tsai encountered this time. They are not satisfied with criticizing an individual's political opinions; they want to take business relationships and turn them into channels for exerting political pressure. When Shen Bo-yang expresses his political views, his father's company's transactions are sanctioned. Beijing uses his family members and business partners as chips, making those around him start to calculate: Should I advise him to say less? Should I keep some distance from him?

"Taiwan and China are two separate countries; Taiwan and China are not subordinate to each other."

On October 28, 2025, the Chongqing police announced that they had opened a case against Shen Bo-yang on suspicion of the crime of splitting the country. In the Chongqing Public Security Bureau's notification, the Taiwanese civil defense organization was characterized as an organization that splits the country. A Taiwanese person established a civil defense organization in Taiwan, and the Chongqing police filed a case against him from across the strait.

For Beijing, this also serves a propaganda purpose. In their discourse, Shen Bo-yang has become an enemy of the people whom everyone wants to beat up. Therefore, when patriotic citizens in the mainland see Kevin Tsai sitting in the audience for Shen Bo-yang, they are no longer facing an ordinary Taiwanese candidate. Lists, sanctions, formal charges, and notifications have already bound Shen Bo-yang's name to a whole set of dangerous labels.

So, why is Beijing so wary of Shen Bo-yang? Apart from his credentials, an important reason is that he has pushed resistance against the CCP from political slogans into defensive preparations that ordinary people can participate in. The CCP hopes to use the disparity in strength to intimidate Taiwanese people, making them believe that resistance is useless, right? Such civil defense initiatives, however, argue that the danger is real, but you can learn how to respond to minimize harm.

He studies information warfare and also discusses how China influences the perceptions of Taiwanese people. Beijing wants to use its own narrative to influence Taiwanese society, while Shen Bo-yang teaches people how to verify these claims. Therefore, Beijing's hostility toward him cannot be explained solely by his party affiliation. There are many political figures in the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), but the work Shen Bo-yang does directly touches upon the relationship between the CCP's threat propaganda and social mobilization.

This year, Shen Bo-yang is running for mayor of Taipei, and his main opponent happens to belong to the Kuomintang (KMT) camp, which Beijing is more willing to engage with. "Everyone can freely participate in political activities; I think this is a value we jointly insist on protecting. This is the true meaning of democracy. I want to call on mainland China to respect Taiwan's free and democratic way of life."

Shen Bo-yang's main opponent is the incumbent KMT mayor of Taipei, Chiang Wan-an. He is the son of Chiang Hsiao-yen and is often referred to as the fourth generation of the Chiang family. He worked as a lawyer in the United States in his early years, was elected as a legislator in 2016, and was elected mayor of Taipei in 2022. This time, he is seeking re-election.

Chiang Wan-an follows a path that advocates cross-strait exchanges. In August 2023, he traveled to Shanghai to attend the Twin City Forum, emphasizing that the more unstable the cross-strait situation is, the more dialogue is needed. He met with the mayor of Shanghai, and the two cities also signed memoranda of cooperation in areas such as exhibitions and carbon reduction.

So, to put it in a way that is easiest for the audience to understand, the two men's choices on the China issue are quite different. Shen Bo-yang places defense against the CCP's threat as the top priority, while Chiang Wan-an emphasizes exchange and dialogue, hoping to maintain cross-strait relations in a state that allows for interaction.

"If we follow the way they are holding these events now, I think it's dangerous. First, I already mentioned the political premise. Yes, the second is, for example, if you want to exchange traffic data with them, to me, that is also a danger because they are a country that is hostile to you."

Beijing is certainly more comfortable dealing with the latter route, and it has always liked to use exchanges to prove that there are people in Taiwan willing to get closer to China. However, being willing to go to Shanghai for exchanges and being willing to accept Beijing's dictates on the political life of the Taiwanese people are two completely different things.

After all, Chiang Wan-an has to run in a Taiwanese election. He needs to answer the questions of Taipei citizens, needs to win over those who have not yet decided who to vote for, and also needs to prove that he can safeguard their way of life. The Taiwan Affairs Office's attitude toward him cannot replace the votes in the hands of Taipei voters.

Currently, the election is somewhat intense, which makes both the KMT and the CCP nervous. On September 22, the Taipei Cross-Strait Research Association released a poll conducted from September 16 to 18, interviewing 1,076 Taipei citizens. In this survey, 41.7% supported Shen Bo-yang, while 40.5% supported Chiang Wan-an. The two are separated by 1.2 percentage points, with a maximum sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

There is another set of more interesting numbers here. The same survey asked everyone who they thought had the best chance of winning. 57.8% favored Chiang Wan-an, while only 21.3% favored Shen Bo-yang. These two questions ask different things. The former is asking who you are willing to vote for, while the latter is asking who you think will win. A person can be willing to vote for Shen Bo-yang while simultaneously feeling that Chiang Wan-an is more likely to win.

Therefore, in this survey, Shen Bo-yang has gained a batch of support but has not yet gained the same level of confidence in his victory. For a challenger, this difference is very practical. It is one thing for voters to like you, but whether they are willing to believe you can change the situation and whether they are willing to persuade the people around them is another matter.

The establishment meeting on October 4 was just such a political event. President Lai Ching-te, Vice President Hsiao Bi-khim, former President Tsai Ing-wen, and others attended, with Tsai even serving as the head of the campaign headquarters. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) invited important figures to the stage to boost the momentum of the election. Having heavyweight figures from within the party endorse the event showed how much the DPP valued this election.

Well-known hosts sitting in the audience might make people who normally only watch variety shows and rarely listen to campaign speeches start asking what was happening right there. Kevin Tsai was one such figure; Chinese audiences knew him, and audiences with different political stances in Taiwan knew him too. He did not go on stage to shout for victory; merely appearing in the audience became news that day.

In fact, artists being forced to publicly prove themselves because of a political label has happened many times. And Beijing is not satisfied with the final result every time.

"Hello everyone, I have something to say to everyone. Hello everyone, I am Chou Tzu-yu. I'm sorry, I should have come out to apologize earlier."

Let's go back to 2016. That year, Taiwanese girl Chou Tzu-yu was only sixteen years old, and she had just debuted in a South Korean girl group not long ago. On a South Korean show, she held a Republic of China flag. A girl who grew up in Taiwan held a flag used by Taiwan, but on Huang An's Weibo, this action became material to report her for Taiwan independence.

The boycott subsequently affected Chou Tzu-yu and her agency in South Korea. They initially tried to explain that she was still a minor with no relevant political speech or behavior, and then emphasized respect for the one-China principle, apologizing to Chinese netizens. Finally, on the evening of January 15, a video of Chou Tzu-yu herself appearing was released. Holding a script, she read a statement about one China and her identity, and then bowed to the camera.

Originally, she went on the show to perform and greet the audience; now, her appearance to confess and declare her narrow political stance to the Chinese market were one and the same. "I have always been proud to be Chinese."

In the eyes of patriotic masses, this proved that reporting works, that threats of bans work, and that if my side is big enough, the other side will bow their heads. But in the eyes of the Taiwanese people, what they saw was an underage girl forced to endure such humiliation simply for holding a flag she was familiar with.

The timing of that video's release was also very sensitive. On January 16, Taiwan held its presidential election. On the night before the election, footage of a Taiwanese girl publicly apologizing suddenly became news that every camp had to face. Even the Kuomintang (KMT) had no way to cover for Huang An. The KMT issued a response on its official website at the time, expressing sadness for Chou Tzu-yu and sternly condemning Huang An's reporting and the handling by her agency. It also emphasized that the KMT has always guarded the flag of the Republic of China.

Over the years, loyalty vetting has not stopped at the Republic of China flag. Later, Taiwanese artists also had to face reposting posters, celebrating National Day, and making timely statements during certain political moments.

In May 2024, after Lai Ching-te took office as Taiwan's president, CCTV released posters about reunification, and Taiwanese artists successively reposted them. Chinese netizens compiled a list tracking who had and had not made a statement. By May 29, Taiwan Affairs Office spokesperson Zhu Fenglian openly displayed and affirmed such statements at a press conference.

She said that nearly a hundred Taiwanese entertainment figures expressed their identity in various ways, explaining it as natural emotion. This could not simply be reduced to a few netizens liking to meddle in other people's business. Officials bringing artists' reposts to a press conference as proof of cross-strait identity was equivalent to telling the patriotic masses checking the lists: this matter has political value, and the Party likes it.

In March 2025, another round of similar scenes appeared. CCTV released posters on Taiwan's inevitable return, compiling and reporting the reposts of Taiwanese artists such as Patty Hou, Mark Chao, and Angela Chang. Some reposts even included topics about Taiwan Province, China. Following these screenshots, netizens continued to name those who had not reposted and demanded that they come and submit their assignments. The names of Jay Chou, Jolin Tsai, Hebe Tien, and others were brought up again for questioning.

Saying you were Chinese in the past might mean next time you have to prove that Taiwan belongs to China. Having posted once in the past, at a new political moment, you have to post on Weibo all over again. Past guarantees cannot buy permanent peace. The CCP uses artists' fame to promote reunification, showing domestic netizens that even those popular people in Taiwan have to speak according to our narrative. Statements forced out through performances and endorsements cannot prove that the people of Taiwan are willing to accept Beijing's united front tactics.

Only fools would take whether a Taiwanese artist congratulates National Day as proof of whether their country is strong or not. Cyber mobs, however, have learned one thing: if you don't make a statement, I will go besiege your business partners, brands will sever ties, and they will more actively look for the next target. The CCP constantly rewards this kind of behavior, naturally breeding thugs who are increasingly enthusiastic about political censorship.

Going back to the 2021 Tokyo Olympics, Dee Hsu cheered for Taiwan athletes on social media. She referred to these competitors as national team athletes and also talked about inviting them to her home for dinner. These few words quickly brought attacks from Chinese netizens. They believed how could Taiwan athletes be called national team athletes? Consequently, Dee Hsu was labeled as pro-Taiwan independence. Within a single day, four Chinese brands announced the termination of their endorsement contracts.

Dee Hsu later stated on Weibo that she was not pro-Taiwan independence, but prior to that, Strait Voice, a military-backed media outlet responsible for broadcasting to Taiwan, had already stepped out to try and cool things down. It published an article on August 4 saying that Taiwan compatriots live in a different social environment, and one cannot demand that their everyday vocabulary be the same as that of the Chinese mainland. It also explicitly stated that Dee Hsu's use of the term national team athlete was very normal in Taiwan's environment, had no necessary connection to Taiwan independence, and reminded netizens to prevent well-intentioned actions from ending up with bad results.

A military media outlet responsible for propaganda toward Taiwan actually had to remind patriotic netizens that you cannot police how others speak in their daily lives, because it also knew that if things continued this way, the CCP's work toward Taiwan would be harmed. Yet by the time it came out to offer explanations, brand disconnections had already happened. Some people still felt Dee Hsu's statement was not sincere enough, demanding that she not only explain on Weibo but also clarify clearly on other platforms.

In September of the same year, Zhang Junning faced similar attacks. What got dug up this time was his 2010 master's thesis titled Legal Issues on the Economic Management of Our Country's Performing Artists, which discussed the rights and management between artists and talent agencies. Some netizens locked onto our country in the title, and then locked onto the Republic of China calendar year in the signature, considering these as evidence that his political stance was problematic. A thesis from a Taiwan school thus became material demanding that an actor account for his stance.

Zhang Junning's studio later published a statement denying any pro-Taiwan independence stance and emphasizing his identification with the Chinese identity. By September 15, the Taiwan Affairs Office also officially responded to the issues of Dee Hsu and Zhang Junning being attacked. It was stated that there must be reasons behind these online hype campaigns, and they would thoroughly investigate and handle them. It also cast suspicion on certain political forces in Taiwan, believing they were creating trouble, obstructing exchanges, and provoking cross-strait confrontation.

There was a bit of the thief crying stop thief to this. The CCP was unwilling to let the siege undermine cross-strait exchanges, yet refused to admit that this set of censorship standards was handed down by themselves. Netizens followed anti-Taiwan independence slogans to scrutinize the daily lives of Taiwan people, and when trouble was stirred up, the Taiwan Affairs Office instead blamed Taiwan people for provoking again, and finding another behind-the-scenes villain couldn't wash away its own responsibility.

Nowadays, the situation offstage regarding what Kevin Tsai did has become even harder to manage. Who exactly has the Taiwan Affairs Office named? The police have already filed a case. If merchants explained on his behalf that he just went to listen, they would be questioned whether you didn't know who it was? And once merchants started cutting ties, this became news, and also became a political event that Taiwan candidates must respond to.

On October 5, Shen Bo said in an interview that Kevin Tsai wanting to hear different voices is a very normal thing in a democratic society. He also expressed that if given the opportunity to accept an exclusive interview with Kevin Tsai, he would have a very high willingness.

What is more worth watching is Chiang Wan-an. Yesterday Kevin Tsai went to his competitor's event, but today he had to step out to call on China to respect Taiwan's free and democratic lifestyle and support Kevin Tsai in expressing his own propositions. He also openly invited Kevin Tsai to come to his campaign headquarters establishment event and promised to arrange a spot in the mosh pit.

Kevin Tsai subsequently responded that if he received a specific invitation, he would gladly go to observe and would try his best to coordinate with the clothing theme to finish speaking. Wan-an needed to win over Taiwan voters, and could not use Kevin Tsai's freedom to appease Beijing's satisfaction. Even if he did not want this famous host to support opposition, he had to admit that the other party had the right to listen to his opponent's speech.

Sieging one Kevin Tsai instead pushed two competitors together. Even Chiang Wan-an had to publicly reject this kind of interference. What? The political pressure from the CCP that Bo Yang long talked about has now been personally shown by mainland netizens and merchants to Taiwan people: go listen to a campaign speech, and your business will be punished. Would this add points to the scrutinized election sentiment? Beijing turning the harmless Kevin Tsai into a political event was already doing a disservice.

My judgment is that, according to the CCP's own interests, this matter should have been handled in a low profile. I do not believe that those doing propaganda toward Taiwan could not figure out this math. But these years of political propaganda have long trained the reactions of patriotic citizens into a conditioned reflex: seeing a Taiwan independence label means facing punishment. Whoever dared to come out and offer a word of advice might again be scolded for being too soft on Taiwan independence. Now wanting to stop, one has to face how to handle the emotions of the patriotic masses they themselves cultivated.

During Nancy Pelosi's visit in 2022, a similar counter-visit occurred. Before that, hardline sentiment in China was constantly being stoked. Hu Xijin, former editor-in-chief of the Global Times, even discussed the possibility of sending military aircraft to intercept or even shooting down the plane under certain circumstances. People online waited along, thinking they would really see Beijing use its habitual toughness to stop her.

As it turned out, on the evening of August 2nd, Pelosi's plane arrived safely in Taipei. After she completed her visit and left, Beijing later held large-scale military exercises. But the military exercises could not satisfy the appetite of those who were already waiting to see the plane intercepted.

Usually, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) relies on this set of rhetoric to bully artists and incite hatred. Today, however, it has backfired on them, and there is nothing to complain about. Isn't this exactly the phrase the CCP loves to use within the party? Lifting a rock only to drop it on one's own feet; I can only say they deserve it. Who told you to love playing with fire all the time.