THE RECENT raiding of news outlets under the influence of President Yoon Suk-yeol engendered controversy on the permissible boundaries of presidential authority on the media. Media officials are raising their voices for the freedom of speech which nonetheless could not stop the full investigation conducted by the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office. In light of the situation, the public is monitoring the developments of confrontational situations and weighing the importance of freedom of speech and presidential authority[1]. 

     Yoon’s control of the media

   On the morning of September 14, several prosecutors were dispatched from a specially organized team to seize and search Newstapa and JTBC. Despite active protests by reporters and staff that insisted on the right to reject cooperation without a lawyer, the investigation was nonetheless undertaken for the alleged crime of defaming Yoon during his election period. The allegations held both Newstapa and JTBC for disclosing an allegedly "manipulated" interview which, according to the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office, was willfully done to target Yoon during his candidacy in 2022. The investigation extended as far as rummaging into the residences of reporters such as Bong Ji-wook and Han Sang-jin in accordance with the Act on Promotion of Information and Communication Network Utilization and Data Protection[1][2]. 

   This is not the first time that the debate on the Yoon’s intention to control the media has flared up during his presidency. For instance, in August, 2023, Yoon designated Lee Dong-kwan, a figure previously alleged to exert control on the media with strong political bias, as the chairperson of the Korea Communications Standards Commission (KCSC)[1]. Also, in November, 2022, controversy stirred when Yoon deliberately excluded the broadcasting company MBC from boarding the presidential plane to report on his Southeast Asia tour. Yoon explained that MBC committed misdeeds of reporting biased and distorted information on diplomatic affairs. While he did not explicitly mention the details, this is seen as a retaliatory act for MBC, who had covered Yoon's use of foul language when referring to U.S. lawmakers in September, 2022[3].     

   Yoon’s vindictive act toward unfavorable media coverage of him sparked backlash from major press such as The Hankyoreh and The Kyunghyang Shinmun who, in protest of Yoon's decision, refused to travel on the presidential plane. The Hankyoreh claimed that Yoon's decision to isolate MBC was antidemocratic and intended to control the media. The question hovers over whether the use of a public asset, funded by a government budget, can be used only by selective media outlets at the discretion of the president[4].

   The frustrating sentiments of the media are explicitly seen in surveys conducted by the Journalists Association of Korea in June, 2022. According to a survey, approximately 80% of the reporters in service opposed Yoon’s decision to delegate Lee Dong-kwan, owing to his strong press suppression during the Lee Myung-bak administration[1]. Nevertheless, a month later in September, the KCSC sternly announced its plan in line with Yoon's standpoint to extend the scope of screening the media to include videos and online content in addition to organizing the reporting window for fake news. This permits the KCSC to independently censor the media without the authority of the Press Arbitration Committee, which was previously responsible for this role[5].

Backlash against media control

   Given the situation, harsh criticisms began to pour in from news media outlets, media organizations, and the Democratic Party of Korea (DP). Newstapa, for instance, claimed that the Yoon administration and politically aligned prosecutors committed a violent takeover to crush media unfavorable to them[1].  Such a critical outlook on Yoon's media control came not only from those who were directly embroiled in conflicts with Yoon, but also the majority of media outlets, based on a survey of 1,000 reporters from 199 different media outlets. According to the Journalist Association Korea, only 10.7% of feedback for Yoon’s handling of media was positive, irrespective of political affiliations, departments, ranks, and age[1]. This is in line with other media associations such as the National Union of Media Workers who criticized Yoon for his counter-democratic acts of censoring the media. DP Representative Park Kwang-on accused Yoon's handling of raiding media outlets of being to intimidate reporters by involving prosecutors and the KCSC. Park believes that Yoon should have followed the formal procedures of requesting the news to be corrected with a review by the Press Arbitration Committee[5]. 

   Public opinion, however, is relatively balanced according to a public poll conducted by Media Tomato, a professional fact tank. The results showed that a slight majority of the respondents replied that they think the enforced investigation of newspapers and JTBC is an act of suppressing the press[6]. However, according to a public poll released by MBC, double the number of people responded that they feel the freedom of speech shrank from the previous administration of Moon Jae-in[7]. 

A way forward

   Considering the storm of controversies on Yoon’s media control, Professor Shim Seog-tae, a professor of journalism, remarks that the president is no exception to the law and order in directing public power. For instance, deciding which media outlet to take on a presidential plane should not be dependent on the mood of the president, given its consequential repercussions. He also notes that the discretion of the president has its own boundaries and should not be crossed arbitrarily[8]. According to the Press Arbitration Committee, an individual or an entity has a right to reply to and correct news, which are upheld by the values of the constitution including freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and human dignity and value[9].

   A call for media control management in the United States has also been issued recently which possibly provides a much-needed insight into a way forward. On July 4, 2023, the Republican Party in the United States filed a case to a federal judge against the Biden administration’s excessive control of social media in filtering information regarding vaccines and elections. This resulted in the Biden administration at least temporarily refraining from imposing control on the media[10]. The federal court also advised that "urging, encouraging … in any manner, the removal, deletion, suppression, or reduction of content containing protected free speech" is prohibited in accordance with the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution[10]. The executive authority is acknowledged to regulate the media for rightful reasons and an immediate action is put into effect to preserve the freedom of speech which is undisturbed by the governing power[10].

*                 *                 *

   A note of discord between the media and the president continues to exist in generations of Korean presidential administrations. Whether progressive or conservative, the governing power has commonly exerted its influence on the media. As remarked by Shim, it is of paramount importance to fortify a self-regulatory system undisturbed by the wind of political shifts to prevent recurrences of cases harming the freedom of speech[8].

[1] The Hankyoreh

[2] Yonhap

[3] BBC

[4] Sisajournal

[5] KBS

[6] Newstomato

[7] MBC

[8] Hankook Ilbo

[9] Press Arbitration Committee

[10] Reuters