Defenders of freedom do not interfere with free media
Unionized media workers have formed the mainstay of Korea's two public broadcasters ― KBS and MBC ― since the late 1980s.
It was a reaction from the long period of state-controlled broadcasting under military dictatorships. However, the government's attempt to control the media was revived during the presidency of Lee Myung-bak (2008-13).
The conservative leader tried to silence critical media using the state spy agency. For broadcasting, he established the Korea Communications Commission (KCC). It is a powerful agency that holds sway over the two public broadcasters' personnel management and daily operations.
Most presidents, conservative or progressive, replace KBS and MBC managers with figures sympathetic to them. But Lee went much further, driving out and destroying critics by blocking their advertising revenues, according to former spies and prosecutors. Lee did all these through his chief press secretary, Lee Dong-kwan, the officials said via records.
Last Friday, President Yoon Suk Yeol appointed Lee as the KCC chief.
Yoon did so, although the National Assembly failed to adopt a report after Lee's confirmation hearing due to opposition parties' objections. It was the 16th appointment of cabinet minister-level officials in defiance of parliamentary opposition in as many months. Yoon may say the majority opposition has gotten in his way. However, surveys show that 80 percent of journalists and 60 percent of the public oppose Lee taking on that job.
Yoon's latest move follows separating the collection of KBS's near-universal viewing charge from the electricity bill. His political opponents say the next step will be a management overhaul to air news sympathetic to the president and ruling party in the run-up to parliamentary elections next May. The public will also watch such developments closely. Besides elections, the conservative leader seems to badly need allies among terrestrial broadcasters in addition to right-wing newspapers and cable channels because of his new policy drive.
Yoon is now staging an ideological war against what he termed "pseudo-progressives." He attacks unionists, activists and many others who criticize his policies by referring to them as "anti-state forces" and "reprobates." His administration turns a deaf ear to calls from the bereaved families of victims of various safety accidents to conduct more objective and extensive probes. These were human disasters and government failures, but officials regard protesters as manipulated by "anachronistic instigators." So are fishermen opposing Japan's release of radioactive water into the sea.
The Yoon administration needs friendly public broadcasters to air related news "from a more positive angle." Given his track record, few other persons can fulfill that mission better than Yoon's new broadcasting czar.
As the primary spin doctor for the former president, Lee suppressed critical media outlets and journalists and bolstered sympathetic ones. At his confirmation hearing, Lee justified his past acts as "basic duties." He even compared critical media to "communist mouthpieces," defining them as those who support rulers' policies even without confirming them. One can't help but ask, then, which are government propaganda machines here and now ― critical progressive or supportive conservative media?
President Yoon's appointment of Lee is also self-denial for two reasons. First, according to the probe records, Lee's previous digression was revealed by investigations Yoon ordered when he was the head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutor's Office. Do ends justify means, and do the boundaries of justice and even legitimacy crumble before political gains?
Second, Yoon's first and foremost value is freedom. However, according to Reporters Without Borders, Korea's press freedom index fell by four notches under the current government. Lee will likely pull down that ranking further. Is press freedom not in Yoon's freedom dictionary?
Press freedom and public broadcasters are now on the wane worldwide due to autocrats, populists, and challenges from OTTs and social media. However, the guardians of freedom and democracy must guarantee, not weaken, the independence of public broadcasters.
Broadcasters must reflect on themselves, including laxity in financial and other operations. They must ask why an increasing number of viewers, including millennials and the Z generation, avoid them.
Provided public broadcasters' self-reform efforts, right-wing politicians' media control attempts will fail, as they did even 15 years ago.