Journalists in Peril: The Korean Case

By KIM Joo-eon,
Former President of JAK,
Currently Secretary-General of the People’s Coalition of Media Reform

June, 2001

Introduction
The relationship between a government and the press is often said to be one where it is best to be not too close and not too far. The press must inevitably be critical of the government, while the government wants the press to publicize its policies. Thus the term is derived to mean that it is desirable for the press to maintain a proper distance from the government. But in reality, the government often doles out special benefits to journalists and media company owners to maintain favorable relations with them, and the press in turn enjoy the benefits and form close ties with the government. On the other hand, when the press insists on maintaining a critical position against the government, the government can employ various suppression measures. In severe cases, journalists are murdered, or arrested and tortured.

In Korea too, under military regimes in the past, journalists were often arrested and tortured on the charges of having violated the National Security Law. Journalists were also dismissed by newspaper owners under pressure from the government.

Recently, while the external pressure from the government has disappeared in Korea, journalists are still harassed internally by media owners, interested in controlling the editorial right to maximize the newspaper profit, and by media advertisers who also want to interfere with the media editorial rights. There is now a new authority, not that of the government, but that of the media owners and advertisers which greatly threaten the autonomy and independence of Korean journalists.

The discussion document on human rights in Part Three of the IFJ General Secretary’s Report illustrates the dedication of many journalists in the world who are fighting for press freedom under threats of losing their lives. According to the General Secretary’s Report “Journalists in Peril: An agenda For Action on Human Rights,” more than 30 journalists were assassinated in the last 10 years in India; during the same period, in Mexico, more than 30 journalists were assassinated and media received threats, intimidation, and attacks; in Pakistan, more than 20 journalists were targeted and killed because of their work in the same period; in Peru, 30 journalists have been assassinated; in the Philippines, Turkey, and Russia together, more than 130 journalists were assassinated; all together, more than 240 journalists were assassinated in various parts of the world in the last ten years, showing that journalism remains a dangerous profession.

In Korea, we cannot ignore these assassinations and threats as other people’s affairs. Journalists of the world should strictly monitor countries in which journalists are threatened and attacked and respond to them aggressively through international solidarity. Journalists of the world must protest, in solidarity with the people in respective countries and using the new movement medium such as the internet, to correct the suppression of the press.

The Change in the Status of the Press in Korea
The status of the Korean journalists is not as desperate as in the past when journalists risked their very lives for simply doing their job of reporting under the military dictatorship. Quite on the contrary, today, with the installment of a democratic government and the guarantee of the freedom of the press established, there have been strong criticisms against the press and journalists in Korea. The press is accused of becoming more and more part of the established power, and the journalists, of reigning over the people with gratuitous elite consciousness. In other words, what we have in Korea today is a demand not for press freedom but for press reform. The current Korean government reinstated the status of the journalists dismissed or arrested in the past by the military regimes. It also paid compensation to these reporters, formally recognizing the legitimacy of their contribution to the democratization process in Korea.

This is not to say that the press in Korea is completely independent from power and money and is bathing in benefits of press freedom. Since the 1997 Asian financial crisis that hit hard on Korea, many newspapers experienced financial difficulties of their own, and a countless number of journalists was laid off in the name of “honorary retirement.” Moreover, many newspapers are introducing a new pay system, the annual salary system. This new system is threatening career security of many journalists. The new pay system gives the newspaper owners a means to control the editorial right and puts the very livelihood and welfare of journalists in the owners’ hands. Moreover, depending on the company policy, the journalists must now, when demanded, act as a sales person for advertisement orders and write promotional articles for the advertiser. That is how strong the influence of the advertisers has become.

In Korea, the issue of libel and the infringement on the right to mourn and of privacy by the press is more of an acute problem than that of the protection of human rights for journalists. Recently the number of libel suits between media companies has increased rapidly, and the damage compensation amount demanded has also been increasing, reaching hundreds of thousands of dollars. In particular, with the influence of the internet as a medium increasing, unverified information can now spread rapidly, increasing the number of libel cases stemming from the internet. The anonymity in the internet is also used as a weapon for indiscriminate personal attacks, and the cases of such “cyber terrorism” are rapidly increasing. Also, with the explosion of pornographic sites on the internet, there is a strong public demand to introduce an “internet grading system,” giving a rise to a new social debate on the issue of the freedom of expression.

The spread of the internet as a new medium has risen as a new task to be solved by limitation on information access by journalists working in the medium. In other words, there is a rising voice that demands that the so-called press rooms, now monopolized by reporters from traditional media, must be open to internet news reporters. Moreover, a severe cutback on the number of reporters working in the medium is taking place with the profit from the medium not reaching the expected level.

Increasing Demand for Media Reform in Korea
In the past, when the Korean press was playing the role of a mouthpiece for the dictatorial government, the press enjoyed various privileges from the government, including an exemption of the corporate tax audit. This was a classic case of the collusion between a government and the press, and the Korean press had been criticized accordingly, being labeled as an “institutional press.” The authoritarian government used a double-edged sword. On one hand, it forcibly dismissed close to 1,000 journalists and arbitrarily consolidated media companies. On the other hand, the government attempted to mobilize the surviving media companies as means to publicize its policies and gave media companies various special privileges, seeking close ties between the political power and the press.

After the installment of the civilian government, some newspaper companies have been reigning over the people, engaging in political activities to “make a president” by supporting a particular candidate through impartial articles on their papers.

The newspapers have been exempt from tax audits, and the management of these companies has been veiled. There have been suspicions that these companies have been evading taxes on the dealings with their local branches and advertisers. Newspaper owners are also suspected of evading inheritance and gift tax in the process of transferring company stocks to their sons. When it comes to the management of other corporations, these newspapers are adamant that the transparency of corporate management is the shortcut to a national economic development. However, when it comes to their own corporate management, they draw an iron curtain.

Most of the major daily newspapers today are owned by third-generation direct owners. On their papers, they criticize the “management empires” of jaebol, or the mega conglomerates in Korea. But, they continue their own imperial successions. Most of the Korean newspaper owners not only own and manage the newspaper but also control the editing as well, using the newspaper as a means to achieve personal profits and gains.

Now, as the market competition grows more intense, these newspaper companies have been giving away expensive free gifts to consumers for promotional purposes, distributing volumes of free copies, and forcing individual subscriptions, ultimately wreaking havoc with the newspaper market order. Moreover, the newspapers would carry negative articles on companies not advertising in their papers. Or, they would write an article on a company, similar to an “informercial” in purpose, and run it on their paper without a prior consent and demand for an advertisement fee from the company. These are grossly unfair trade activities taking places in Korea, not found in any other country in the world. Where else but in South Korea would “kick boards,” the popular skate boards with handles priced at 100,000 won for retail,– or approximately US$90–be given away and families receive unwanted and un-requested papers for weeks, even months, on end? Where else but in South Korea would companies be forced to advertise or be demanded to pay for an advertisement they did not subscribe to in advance?

In the Korean newspaper industry, the income ratio between advertising and newspaper sales is 8:2, meaning that the companies are heavily dependent on advertisement for income. Furthermore, most of the advertisements are subscribed by large conglomerates. It is not surprising then that newspapers devote much of their editorial energy in defending these conglomerates and that legitimate demands of the trade unions are ignored.

To address these egregious problems in the Korean newspaper industry, People’s Coalition for Media Reform (PCMR) demanded that the government conduct tax audits on newspaper companies and establish relevant regulations for fair trade. We demanded for the tax audit, because the special exemption privileges granted to the newspaper companies are a legacy from the past when the press and the dictatorial governments colluded. Now the Korean press must be reborn and return to what it should be: an independent and autonomous voice, monitoring environment and constructively criticizing wrongful uses of publicly endowed power.

In Korea, companies with assets worth more than 10 billion won –approximately US$ 8 million– are subject to tax audits every five years. However, for mass media companies, it has been seven years since the last tax audit was conducted. It took place under the Kim Youngsam administration in 1994. However, the Kim Youngsam government did not unveil the result of the audit and was criticized for using the process for an ulterior purpose of controlling the media. President Kim Youngsam had made an announcement at the time that evidences of corruption were found as a result of the audit and that the amounts of tax evasion by the newspaper companies were too vast to fully recover. He had stated that the government had reduced the amount of taxes to be collected from such companies.

In light of what occurred in the past, PCMR demand that the Kim Daejung government release the findings of the current tax audit once it is completed. The normalization of the newspaper market must be based on the findings of such investigations, and the government must implement policies to monitor the transparent management of media companies.

In Korea, the newspaper market is not governed by market economy principles. As mentioned before, the high-priced freebies, indiscriminate distribution of free newspapers, and forced advertisements or advertising without a prior consent continue to distort the market, and such activities are taking place unchecked. Accordingly, to make advances in the newspaper market, the Fair Trade Commission must investigate these and other unfair practices and take appropriate measures to either amend existing laws or pass new legislation based on the findings of the investigation.

It must be noted that the “newspaper posting,” which was abolished in 1996, will be revived as of July 1st, this year. The purpose of the “newspaper posting” is to specify standards of general guidelines for fair trade activities. For example, the posting would ban the offering of free gifts and set the number of free copies that can be delivered per household.

TAX AUDIT 2001
This year, the government has launched investigations on newspaper and broadcasting companies, probing into their tax records, trade practices, and internal transactions. In addition, the Fair Trade Commission has revised the newspaper posting and will revive it as of July 1st. The opposition party and major newspaper companies have vehemently criticized these measures, stating that the government measures constitute a full-scale media oppression. However, the reaction of the opposition party is a politically motivated offensive attack, while the claims of media oppression by newspaper companies constitute a defensive attack to keep their transgressions forever in veil. The newspaper companies do not have publicly justifiable reasons to oppose the tax audits. The newspaper companies therefore print the opposition party comments as headlines, using it as their ammunition to attack the government policy to do the tax investigation. They use the same ammunition, i.e. the claim of media oppression, to attack the revival of the newspaper posting as well as to attack the investigation into unfair trade practices, all of which are necessary measures to normalize the newspaper market.

In particular, some newspapers printed reports by foreign media organizations. One newspaper claimed that a foreign organization stated that “the Korean government is suppressing the media,” distorting the meaning of the original text. Quoting from a human rights report published by the U.S. State Department, Chosun Ilbo printed an article entitled “Korean Government’s Indirect Control of the Press: Influencing the Media through Tax Audits and Pressure on Advertisers.” In this article, Chosun Ilbo mistranslated a “latent” as a “latest” threat, and “companies” as “a company.” These translation mistakes can only be construed as intentional mistakes, stemming from the newspaper’s desire to borrow a respected foreign authority to give the Korean public an impression that the government policy is one that oppresses the media. Other newspapers have also used wrong statements by International Press Institute, Reporters sans Frontier, and other international press organizations, to distort the tax investigation as suppression on the media. In response, IFJ issued a statement, on June 1st, stating that “the publishers’ claim of threat on the press freedom in regards to the Korean government’s tax investigations into financial activities of media companies is unreasonable and exaggerated.” The IFJ further stated that “Korean journalist organizations refuse to accept such perspective as one that seems to be an attempt by media establishment to take the public attention away from a national debate on the need for a media reform.” Since then, the newspapers’ claim of the media oppression has weakened.

In Korea, top three newspapers control more than 70% of the market share, and they have massive capital power as their weapon. Where else in the world does such a small number of newspapers hold so great a share in the market as in Korea? The presence of the top three newspapers in the market is pervasive, and their influence in shaping public opinion cannot be ignored; if the three newspapers defended fascism, the public could very well follow. In fact, these newspapers represent the interests of the establishment. Yet, they oppose the Fair Trade Commission’s effort to establish fair trade practices through the revival of the newspaper posting, claiming that the Commission’s measures will decrease their influence as an independent and critical voice. What they are opposing to, in fact, is a normalization of the newspaper market, a prevention of oligarchy, and a promotion of diversity of ideas and opinions in our society, the true responsibility of the press in any society.

To correct the Korean press, which is becoming a power establishment itself through collusion with the government and businesses and is ruling over the will of the people, media and civil organizations in Korea are joining hands together. They are demanding that the media in Korea sever their ties with established power and money and be reborn as truly independent and autonomous agents in our society, to monitor the environment and criticize the establishment, the true responsibility of the media.

The Reinstatement of Dismissed Journalists
Currently, Korean journalists are free from threats of assassination or torture. There are reporting restrictions coming from within a media company, but no direct external threat exists. Occasionally, reporters are assaulted by informants, but it’s difficult to call it a systematic press oppression. On the contrary, what has begun in Korea is a process of reinstating journalists who were dismissed for their democratization activities during the military dictatorship.

The Korean government has paid compensation to families of those who died in the 1980 Kwangju People’s Uprising, the massacre of innocent citizens by Chun Doo-hwan regime after it took over the government by a military coup d’etat. The current government also paid compensation to democratization heroes and heroines who were imprisoned through direct or indirect link to the Uprising. The ‘new military,’ led by Chun Doo-hwan, massacred the people of Kwangju who were demonstrating for democracy. The new military also arrested intellectuals and journalists en mass on a trumped up charge of “high treason led by Kim Dae-jung.” Chun Doo-hwan regime also dismissed close to 1,000 journalists, and arbitrarily consolidated media companies.

After taking over the power, Chun Doo-hwan regime legislated the heinous Press Foundation Law, which gave the then Minister of Culture and Information the power to cancel the registration status of a newspaper. The regime also delivered so called “press guidelines” to newspaper and broadcasting companies every day. This writer was imprisoned for six months under Chun Doo-hwan regime, in 1986, for having publicly exposed the content of this guideline. The guideline dictated everything from the content of the paper to the minute details such as the size and name of particular articles’ headlines. And, the newspapers followed the guidelines.

The current government paid over 50 million won each to persons who were arrested on charges linked directly or indirectly to the 1980 Kwangju Uprising. Included in the group were many of the former JAK officers who opposed the government censorship of the press under martial law, following the assassination of President Park Chung-hee in October 1979. They initiated a national campaign to stop all newspaper production. Also included in the group were journalists at Gyeong-hyang Shinmun who were some of the most active participants in the stoppage campaign. They had been arrested on the charge of violating the National Security Law.

The Kim Dae-jung administration also legislated the Compensation Law on Democratization Movement to reinstate the reputation of those who had been ill treated for their dedication to democratization movement since the 1970s and to pay compensation to them as well. Following the Law, the government accepted the first batch of applications and is now in the process of deliberating individual applications. At the end of this year, the government plans to receive a second round of applications. The Democratization Movement Deliberation Committee, which reviews the applications, is consisted of civilians. In the first round of deliberation, the Committee recognized the ‘Dong-a Ilbo Struggle Committee for The Protection of the Freedom of the Press’ as a democratization movement organization. The Committee is currently reviewing the records of journalists who were dismissed in 1980, to see if they qualify for the democratization compensation.

The Dong-a Struggle Committee was an organization that was formed in 1975 by 130 journalists who were dismissed from the daily newspaper for protesting against the government suppression of the press. At the time, the government put pressure on advertisers to stop advertising Dong-a Ilbo. It was to deter the journalists’ struggle at Dong-a Ilbo to protect the press freedom. The advertisement stopped, and the paper was printed with blocks of blank spaces, except for small boxes recognizing contributions from individuals who supported the struggle. However, in the end the company yielded to the government pressure and forcibly dismissed the journalists who were on demonstration. The dismissed journalists immediately formed the Struggle Committee, and the members continue to be active in the press freedom movement in Korea today.

The Deliberation Committee deliberated on individual cases of journalists who were dismissed in 1980, and the Committee recognized a number of journalists so far for their contribution to democratization. There are difficulties in the Committee deliberation process, because there were more than one reason for the dismissal of journalists in the wake of the 1980 event. There were journalists dismissed at the request of the government. On the other hand, there were others who were included in the dismissal list arbitrarily by the newspaper owners, and still others accused of corruption. Thus the difficulty for sorting out the genuine victims of the massive dismissal of journalists in 1980.

Expansion of Influence by Media Owners and Advertisers
The majority of Koreans demand for media reform, and communications scholars have also pointed out the independence of the press from the media owners and advertisers as the core task of the press reform movement. The media owners in Korea have been reigning over the people as an emperor and have assumed an exclusive privilege over the use of the newspaper space for personal profits. The media owners have been privatizing the newspaper space, having a control over the management right, personnel right, and editorial right. Journalists must cater to the taste of the media owners when producing the paper. Reporters who protest against the policy of the owners, or who are active in the union, are either demoted or forced to leave the company.

Such a situation has worsened since the 1997 Financial Crisis. At the time many journalists lost jobs in the name of “honorary retirement.” Also, since then the introduction of annual salary system has spread, weakening the career stability of journalists and strengthening the influence of the media owners. Now, once a reporter becomes disagreeable to the owner, he/she would no longer be demoted but forced to quit the company.

Moreover, with worsening financial status of newspaper companies, the managers are requiring reporters to take orders for advertisements, or to write promotional articles to win favors from advertisers, damaging the autonomy and independence of the reporters. Unfortunately, it is difficult to find reporters who refuse such orders in honor of their professional conscience. Many journalists’ unions are also trapped in the elitist attitude of a company-centered mind set.

The influence of advertisers has grown enormously in newspaper production. They use the power of their money to request elimination of articles unfavorable to them, or to carry news articles with strong promotional characteristics. Sometimes, such requests by advertisers are not even necessary. Journalists often write only articles that are favorable to advertisers through self-censorship. Advertisers have now become the biggest obstacle in preventing the press freedom in Korea.

The influence of the media owners is also enormous in Korea. According to a 1997 survey conducted among journalists by JAK, journalists chose media owners (51.3%) as “the group with the most influence on news reporting.” Only 13.8% of the respondents chose the government. In another survey conducted in 1999 by Korea Press Foundation, in regards to the editorial independence of newspapers from the owners, 71% of the reporters surveyed responded negatively: 54.6% said that the independence is not very well guaranteed, while 16.6 said it is not at all guaranteed. The survey showed one of the most urgent tasks to be tackled by the media reform movement in Korea, the editorial independence.

Korea Press Foundation also conducted a survey in May 2001, among 125 communications scholars with Ph.D. or higher degrees, on current issues of journalism. For the most urgent task to be addressed by the media reform movement, 82.5% of the respondents chose the ‘editorial independence;’15.0% chose ‘limitation on equity ownership’ by media owners; and 14.2% chose ‘stabilization of the so-called ABC system, or the Audit Bureau Circulation system. On the question of what should be explicitly stated in the Periodicals Law to be revised, 84.7% of the respondents chose ‘editorial independence’; 55.5% chose ‘stabilization of the ABC system’; and 54.2% chose ‘limitation on equity ownership’ and ‘transparency of management information.’ (Multiple answers).

For survey on what should be the top priority task of the autonomous reform within journalists circles, 58.4% responded the ‘exclusion of pressures from media owners’; 13.6%, the ‘exclusion of pressures from government control’; 12.8%, ‘raising journalists’ ethics’; and 11.2% responded ‘strengthening professionalism.” In the same survey with multiple answers, 78.4 % of the respondents chose ‘exclusion of pressures from media owners’; 52.0%, ‘raising journalists’ ethics’; 46.4%, ‘exclusion of pressures from government control’; and 40.8%, ‘exclusion of interference from advertisers.’

There are also strong voices among the people for media reform in Korea. It is because Korean people have negative opinions on the trend of media companies wielding greater and greater power in our society. The people believe that the press is now acting as an obstacle of social reform in our society. According to a survey conducted by Hankyoreh Shinmun, a newspaper that was founded in 1987 with massive public participation, 91.4% of the respondents said that newspaper reform was necessary. Hankyoreh conducted the survey on 1400 male and female adults over 20 years of age. On the question of “Is newspaper reform needed in Korea?” 29.5% responded ‘very needed,” while 61.9% responded people responded ‘somewhat needed.’ Overall 91.4% of the respondents gave positive answers to the question.

The public voice calling for media reform is not new. In May 1998, a survey was conducted jointly by the then Korea Federation of Press Unions (KFPU), JAK, Broadcasting Producers Association of Korea, and Hankyoreh Shinmun. According to the survey, 86.7% of the Korean people responded that media reform is needed. Also, in December 1999, People’s Coalition for Media Reform (PCMR) conducted a survey among Seoul Metropolitan citizens. In this survey, 96% responded that media reform is needed. In other words, the public has been desiring for a media reform in the Korean society for long time now.

The demand for a media reform in Korea is focused on the revision of the law that oversees the registration of periodicals and cover newspaper regulations. The major points of the revision are to reduce the ever-increasing influence of the media owners, to institutionalize the editorial independence, and to secure transparency of newspaper management. PCMR, of which JAK and KFPU are members, submitted to the National Assembly a proposal for the revision of the Periodicals Law based on the above core points, requesting that the revision be legislated. However, the National Assembly has not even brought the issue to the floor, and the proposed revision has not yet seen daylight in the Assembly.

Violation of Privacy Rights by Media Reports
The influence of the press has grown enormously in Korea, and due to severe competition, newspapers print excessive amount of unverified information leading to libel and infringement on the right to mourn and privacy. This has emerged as a new problem in Korean society. The number of civil and criminal court litigation against media companies is increasing, along with the size of the damage compensation amounts. The court is also gradually raising the compensation amount. Not too long ago, in the death case of an army officer at Panmunjom, a subordinate petty officer was suspected of the murder. Newspapers that reported on the suspect later had to pay tens of millions of wons each in libel cases brought to court by the petty officer.

However, the newspapers’ violation of privacy rights of popular stars is increasing. The sports newspapers in particular use provocative headlines, such as “Suspected of Sex Change,” “Homosexual,” or “I have a lot of sexual experience,” exposing private lives of popular stars without clear factual basis. There are no plans being prepared to improve the situation. In one particular case, the distribution of videotape of a popular female star engaged in private sexual activities, were publicized by all media, including the major daily newspapers as well as broadcasting stations. The media in this case effectively killed the career life of the individual. The individual in this case could not file a suit against the media companies, because her popularity made her a ‘person of public interest.’

With the spread of the internet, cases of “cyber terror” and “libel” are also increasing dramatically. On the internet, information flows in real time. Anybody can access the internet, and there is also the advantage of anonymity. Once a person is attacked on the internet, he/she does not have the time to explain, verify, or control the flow of the information. One’s reputation can easily be buried alive this way.

The increasing number of libel suits against press reports has raised a concern in some corners of the public. This is because, most of the plaintiffs in the cases of libel against major media companies are public employees such as prosecutors or judges, and because there are now cross libel suits between media companies. Libel suits brought to courts by public employees may minimize the function of the press to monitor and criticize them when necessary, and the cross libel suits between media companies can be reduced to mere emotional fights.

JAK has a legal counseling program for journalists who have been accused in libel suits, with no real visible effects so far. This is because Korean journalism has become too used to reporting inaccurate information or distorting facts without regards to what effects such writings may have on the reputation or privacy of the individuals involved. It is therefore urgent that Korean journalists establish reporting ethics.

The cyber space is more open and freer to access when compared to the existing newspaper and broadcasting media. Although there are problems of inaccuracy in this medium as well, the cyber space is nevertheless establishing itself as a medium that demonstrates the power of the civil society. One can say that the internet contributed significantly to the success of the NGO demonstrations in Seattle at the WTO meeting. The internet is now functioning as a new alternative medium of transmitting the power of civil society. People who recognize this also recognize that the cyber space is a place of truly freethinking and an open public forum, despite the fact that there are some negative side effects. Thus the concerned citizens worry that regulations on cyber space can become an obstacle in the advancement of information society.

However, unless the ‘side effects’ are solved, there is a real danger of cyber space being reduced to a forum of hearsay. The internet is a significant medium, which can play the positive role of a newspaper. On the other hand, it can easily damage the reputation of a public person through personal attacks and false information. The internet, having crossed the ‘sea of information’ to reach the ‘sea of pornography’ now can very well become a ‘sea of hearsay’ in the future.

However, realistically it is difficult to regulate the internet. The government’s Information and Telecommunications Ethics Committee is cracking down on pornography sites, but they are vastly outnumbered. Currently the government plans to introduce an internet grading system to protect the youth, but there are many people who are opposed to this policy. No consensus has been formulated as yet in Korea about how to deal with the internet as a medium.

Information Access Rights of the Internet Media
With the spread of the internet as a public medium, the number of layoff reporters in the medium and the medium’s information access right are emerging as new issues. In Korea, the internet media can be categorized into three cases. The first is the category of internet media that are operated by existing newspaper and broadcasting media. The second is the category of internet media established by journalists working in existing media. The third is the independently established and operated internet news media. The internet news company, Oh! My News, which was independently established and operated has grown to be so influential that it ranks in the top 10 of all news media, including the major daily newspapers and the big broadcasting companies. The internet news companies are now demanding ‘press rooms’ of various government and private sector agencies to be open to reporters from internet media.

There was a case recently where a reporter from Oh! My News was expelled from the press room of the newly opened Incheon International Airport. The reporter was in the central press room where the Vice President of the Airport Authority was giving a press briefing. A staff of the ‘Incheon Airport press corps,’ an informal and voluntary organization of fellow journalists who cover the same beat, expelled the Oh! My News reporter on the ground that he was not registered with the press corps at the Airport. In response, Oh! My News has been waging a full-scale debate on the issue and has filed for a court injunction against “the obstruction of entering the press room at Incheon International Airport.”

Attorney Kim Chil-joon helped Oh! My News file for the injunction against the press corps at the Airport. He is a member of the well known civil organization, the People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPD). In the injunction application, Attorney Kim and Oh! My News state that “obstructing the entrance to the press room at the Incheon Airport is an illegal act which prevents the freedom of the press and the public’ right to know, guaranteed by the Constitution.” The application further states that “the Incheon Airport press corps never entered into a contract with Incheon International Airport Authority to receive an exclusive right to use the news room facility and therefore does not have the right to demand the withdrawal of Oh! My News reporters from the facilities.”

Attorney Kim also points out that the press corps set up requirements and procedures for new reporters to register with the corps. Such “entrance wall” he argued “was an illegal act under the Fair Trade Law, unfairly excluding competitors.” He also points out, “government agencies have provided convenience to reporters in the name of promoting the public’s right to know and have operated the so-called press room for reporters to use.” He further states that “the press rooms and the practices of press corps in each of the government agencies have become more than mere facilities for reporters’ convenience but channels of collusion between the government and the press, and that sometimes they have been used to buy off or corrupt reporters, infringing, in fact, on the public’s right to know.”

Attorney Kim and Oh! My News raised the issue of the fact that expenses for operating the press rooms are mostly borne by the hosts. The costs of operating press rooms at government agencies are borne by the agency. Therefore it is in fact the tax money which supports these press rooms. On the other hand, the so called press corps is not a government-recognized organization. It is a voluntary private group organized to serve the convenience of reporters on the beat and the relevant host agencies. No press corps at any of the government agency has right to spend the tax money without a national public consent.

Oh! My News estimated the rent (including the maintenance) cost of press rooms at various government agencies based on current real estate prices. The total estimated rental figure was 60.45 million won per month, or 725 million won per year. Added to this figure the monthly salary for full-time staff at each of these press rooms, the government agencies are estimated to spend approximately 1.3 billion won per year in operating the press rooms. But the journalists using the facilities pay for none of the cost.

The exclusive management of the press rooms has encouraged power concentration and elitism among reporters. In Korean society, reporters have become a class of elite. In particular, the reporters working for the monopolizing few media companies enjoy enormous social prestige and influence as well as economic stability. With the change of their status in the society, the reporters tend to represent the interests of the ruling class in our society, rather than the voice of the weak and the alienated. The monopolistic position of the press corps is further helping the elitism and power concentration among the journalists.

Furthermore, these phenomena restrict the development of a new form of press. Traditionally, media companies are categorized into newspaper, broadcasting, and news service companies. Today, the border between these categories are coming down rapidly, and new media are emerging such as the internet newspaper and internet broadcasting. The new media no longer depend on a few number of elite reporters for information. Now, anybody with a laptop computer and a camcorder can be a reporter. The news they provide in real time are fulfilling the public’s right to know. The new media have broken down the distinction between a reporter and reader, putting into practice and action the concept of information democracy. The customary practice of the traditional media, represented by the operation of the so called press rooms and press corps in major government agencies, not only make it difficult for the newly emerging media to access relevant information, but it obstructs the very emergence of new media.

Host agencies of press corps must establish a system where reporters and the general public not belonging to the press corps have the same access to the information the host agencies give out. The use of the internet is a big boom among not only the various agencies of the central government, but also among local governments and private corporations. These organizations have recognized the need to communicate with the people through their homepages. However, except for a few cases, the homepages are not very well utilized. If these organizations make better use of their homepages, they will not only be able to avoid criticisms of preventing access to information but also be able to publicize their policies more effectively through one-to-one interactive communication with the public.

Copyright(C)2000 People’s Coalition for Media Reform.