The MIC strikes again! It appears the Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC) will soon begin blocking 31 overseas websites deemed “pro-North Korean” by the cyber-fascists of the Information Communication Ethics Committee. CBS (Korean) discussed the issue with Grand National Party lawmaker Kim Suk-joon of the National Assembly’s Science, Technology, Information and Communication Committee and Jinbo Network’s Oh Byeong-il, a discussion I have translated for your reading pleasure below. I have also taken the opportunity to link some of the sites mention, which readers in the ROK should check if for no other reason than if MIC has its way, you won’t be able to for much longer.
Controversy is brewing around measures taken by the Ministry of Information and Communication (MIC) to block access to 31 overseas pro-North Korean websites in accordance with orders from National Intelligence Service (NIS) and National Police Authority (NPA).
We’ll first speak to Grand National Party lawmaker Kim Suk-joon of the National Assembly’s Science, Technology, Information and Communication Committee.
MC (Dr. Jeong Beom-gu): The MIC has handed down measures blocking Internet access to 31 pro-North Korean sites. Some are raising issues whether this is a proper measure for the government to hand down while the intra-Korean relationship is blocked as it is now…
Rep. Kim: The controversial sites contain content in violation of the positive law known as the National Security Law (NSL), and Item 8 of Para. 1 Art. 53 of the Electronic Communications Business Law views content committing acts forbidden by the NSL as illegal communication and forbids it. This is not something decided by the MIC on its own, but something decided after deliberation by the National Assembly Information Communication Ethics Committee (ICEC), in which the highest civilian experts participate.
In this case, the NIS and NPA requested on Oct. 27 that 46 sites be blocked, and the ICEC decided that of these, only 31 were inappropriate.
MC: Which pro-North Korean sites are we talking about generally?
Rep. Kim: A concrete list hasn’t come out yet, but Minjok Tongshin, Baekdoonet, Chosun-ui Norae [I think I got the right site linked], the site of the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan (Chongryun) have been submitted so far.
MC: Bodies of Chongryun like the Choson Sinbo and Choson Tongshin are places South Korea media frequently visit to confirm official North Korean statements…
Rep. Kim: There are many other ways the media could confirm statements besides those channels, and in the past, data about North Korea was graduated into first grade and second grade and classified into material citizens at large could see and material specialists could see. In particular, because there was the issue that minors might be able to see it, there were many cases in which data was differentiated.
Accordingly, there are claims that because we are an open society now, anyone should be able to see data about North Korea, but because there are still a lot of people who lack the ability to judge agitprop information, I think the quality and content of the information should be finally judged expertly within the ICEC, which is made up of specialists.
MC: Among those who protest the blockage, they ask how the sites are designated “pro-North Korean,” and point out the selection was too arbitrary. For example, they ask whether it’s right to block even North Korean song sites and North Korean lottery sites when intra-Korean are blocked.
Rep. Kim: Those sites were originally on the list of 46 sites, but because the list of 31 sites decided by ICEC hasn’t come out yet, I think we’ll have to wait and see with this.
MC: Not only is there a controversy over whether the judgment over the illegal nature of the sites could be made at the government level, but there are also those who point out that it’s an excessive violation by the government of the average Internet user’s right to use information.
Rep. Kim: One could make such criticism. Fundamentally, in a democratic society, freedom for all ideologies and information and freedom of the press are considered important as basic rights. In the case of developed nations like the United Kingdom, Australia and Singapore, however, there are public bodies that decide whether or not public websites are illegal, and in our case now, committees like the Commission on Youth Protection and Korea Media Rating Board rank movies and levels of youth protection.
Accordingly, with the new Internet media, because it is an anonymous society the entire world is newly entering, like developed nations, shouldn’t we, too, block what specialists say should be blocked and ban what they say should be banned? We’re already doing a fine job doing this with lewd and illegal materials.
Because of this, I think the society must tolerate to some extent this with the issue of pro-north Korean sites because the issues of citizens’ basic rights and violations of said rights are being handled by a civilian committee of experts.
MC: Is it technically possible, however, to block individual users from accessing overseas websites?
Rep. Kim: Currently, as long as there’s the will on the part of Internet companies, it’s possible.
Now let’s hear the position of civic groups. We have Oh Byeong-il, bureau chief of Jinbo Network.
MC: What is the position of civic groups on the measures to block access to pro-North Korean sites?
Mr. Oh: Broadly, there are issues on two levels. One in the issue of the NSL, while the other is that the limiting of the freedom of expression and the right to access information through the Internet companies at the discretion of the MIC is a form of censorship.
MC: Before, GNP lawmaker Kim Suk-joon stated the position that just like sites harmful to young people could be blocked, the government could block sites harmful to national security.
Mr. Oh: In order to restrict citizens’ freedom of expression, the thing restricted must directly harm the security of the society, but simply accessing sites about North Korea cannot be seen as directly harming the society.
This will be connected to the issue of the NSL, but just accessing a website isn’t praising North Korea. Everyone has the capability to critique. The Internet is characterized by the ability to choose and access information you want and not access information you don’t want. This is different from normal broadcasts [like radio and TV].
Moreover, for the government to come out and tell people what they can or cannot look at, despite people having the capacity to judge, can be seen as nothing other that the government believing that people lack the capacity to judge.
MC: The issue is that while the NSL continues to exist, as a government institution, the MIC has to regulate this, and it said it did so under and Item 8 of Para. 1 Art. 53 of the Electronic Communications Business Law.
Mr. Oh: There is continuing controversy over the constitutionality of the Electronic Communications Business Law. In 2002, one decision was handed down calling the law unconstitutional. Before that, the MIC was enabled to restrict information consider “seditious.” Determining what’s considered “seditious” was left up to the government’s discretion.
The court said in order to restrict freedom of expression, there needed to be a legal ruling, but for the government, an administrative body, to simply judge such a thing was unconstitutional.
Despite the fact that there was a court ruling calling the law unconstitutional, the MIC simply submitted a amendment changing “seditious” to “illegal,” but this bill, too, we think has grounds to be called unconstitutional. If information were clearly called illegal in a court, I think you could regulate it, but for the government to judge at its own discretion what it illegal would be for the administrative branch of government to make its own judicial decisions.
This means that according to the government’s volition, the citizens’ right to access information and freedom of expression could be regulated.
When the 2002 decision was handed down, the court said, “The Internet is the most participatory medium.” With media like broadcasts or newspapers, the unilateral nature is very strong. But with the Internet, starting with what information one views, the people judge, and they don’t simply accept information unilaterally, but debates are possible in which people can criticize information or participate.
For the government to restrict this based on its own judgments like in the past, despite the fact that it is a democratic medium in which individuals could express things for themselves, is to ignore the special character of the Internet and could be seen as the application of the same forms of control as in the past.
We are not claiming we can permit all expression. In fact, one naturally has to regulate sites that have been judged illegal. But if you look at the way in which this regulation is done currently, the government, not a court, is making the judgment.
15 Comments
NK websites were blocked in the early days of the http://WWW. At some point they started allowing access and got praised for the openness and for advancing democratic freedoms.
If the govt is going to block ‘em, it has probably decided it’s not worth being accused of being pro-NK over a few websites.
Ummm…does it include this one?:
http://koreaismine.blogspot.com/
You’re linked to it, Dear Leader must be a fan
Marmot, is this possibly a signal that the Roh administration is doing a “reverse course” & trying to ingratiate itself to Bush & the neocons?
Asia by Blog
Asia by Blog is a twice weekly feature, posted on Monday and Thursday, providing links to Asian blogs and their views on the news in this fascinating region.
This edition contains China’s petitions system, simulated nukes for North Korea, energy secu…
To come to Mr. Marmot’s defense, North Korean armies are not coming over the DMZ, and there has been no blitzkrieg across it since 1950 nor does there seem any likelyhood of such again in the foreseeable future. In either case, banning pro-North Korean propaganda in the event that North Korea troops were marching on Seoul would seem a bit quixotic by then now wouldn’t it? I think the point is, is that Koreans are intelligent and sophisticated enough to be able to filter out truth from fiction and thus ignore North Korean propaganda. To think otherwise could be considered an insult to the intelligence of the Korean people, and Koreans do tend to get worked up over perceived slights…
I think any rational individual would take one look at propaganda from say the KCNA and dismiss it out of hand. Even if there were a few individuals who could be swayed by it, it wouldn’t be many. If a significant portion of South Koreans could actually be affected by North Korean propaganda, then there are bigger problems on your hand than simply policing the internet. Simply put, such measures may have been neccessary in the past as South Korea was going through its growing pains and social discontent a very real possibility. North Korean propaganda would have been highly effective then and indeed not at all ridiculous considering that the South did not have a clear economic lead over the North until the early 70’s. However, at the present stage of history, and with the current state of Korean society, North Korean propaganda is argueably harmless.
“North Korean armies are not coming over the DMZ, and there has been no blitzkrieg across it since 1950 nor does there seem any likelyhood of such again in the foreseeable future”
Gotta disagree with you right off the bat, Mssr. Jing. I obviously don’t think it is imminent (since I remain here) but no likelihood in the forseeable future? Oh, the risk is a bit higher than zero, and with a regime this secretive, paranoid, and prone to daily bursts of hateful insults to the Republic of Korea, well…..
Yeah, its interesting to accuse people of being a fascist for wanting to defend their country. However, its actually dangerous living next to craazy North Korea and I really don?€™t blame the South Koreans for wanting to limit North Korean influence among the gullible youngsters.
No, I don’t think its fascist to people to want to defend their country. I do, however, think it’s highly unbecoming of a democracy to ban access to websites because of political content (especially one with IT Superpower aspirations), and it is extremely worrying to hear someone like Rep. Kim argue that somehow, the people are too stupid/gullible to be allowed access to the KCNA and need their minders, i.e., the ICEC, to determine what is appropriate and what is not. If you want to keep The Children(tm) from viewing political content considered objectionable, then require one to enter their ID number like the gov’t does with porn sites. But that’s not what MIC’s project seeks to do — it wants service providers to put blocks on IP addresses so the ignorant masses — adults included — can’t read them, because as you know, the South Korean public is so dumb that they’ll soak up whatever the KCNA tells them [sarcasm off].
Look, I’m all for protecting the nation, and no, I don’t belittle the North Korean threat. But what, extactly, do you think a ban on pro-North Korean websites is going to protect South Korea from? Bad rhetorical style? Word-initial “l” (??¹) sounds? The ideological fringe is going to believe regardless of whether they have free and open access to N. Korean websites or not, and by banning them, all you do is give them political ammunition. Besides, the fringe groups are much more a product of local conditions within S. Korea than they are of “North Korean propoganda,” so it’s not like you’d be saving a whole lot of “gullible youngsters” by shutting off some of the few avenues they have to see just how fucked up North Korea really is.
Anyway, perhaps you’re right — maybe knee-jerk libertarianism is a foolish way to go through life. But on the other hand, if you truly believe that North Korean agitprop — which is just as outlandish in the original Korean as it is in translation (granted, it sounds better) — poses a serious threat to the security of the Republic of Korea, well, I guess that ain’t saying much about the prospects for liberal democracy on the Korean Peninsula.
Well, living next to an unusual government which will go to unusual extremes (read the bottom link provided) to destabilize South Korea, sometimes requires unusual actions. And it’s not just about worrying about North Korean propaganda spreading main stream. It’s also about trying to rein in all the radical loose cannons that tries to damage the relationship between the US and S.Korea. The latter reason alone should be enough of a reason, wouldn’t you say?
http://www.time.com/time/asia/.....59,00.html
I guess there is no need for me to bash on HoGuk’s comment, especially because its obvious he has yet to visit any of those sites. I am an avid reader of those sites, and if anything, they are CRUCIAL in waking up the Hanchongryun kids from their naive dreams. If they really wanted to stop “subversive” activities, they would have to shut down Hanchongryun and all the militant labor unions. (not that that is what I am advocating)
When I read news like this, I get very depressed that the opposition party to the No Moo Hyun regime is actually WORSE. It looks like Hannara criminals are paranoid that the openings of North Korean websites would just be the beginning of a deluge of orders for such hot North Korean singles like “Whee Pa Ram” and “Women are Flowers” or such popular classics such as the collected literary works of Chairman Kim’s views on art, theater, and film. We all know that will generate enough hard currency to continue their missile production and blah blah blah.
My anecdotal starting point here is that I know far more atheists who attended Catholic school as kids than atheists who did not attend Catholic school as kids. The surest way to make a perfectly meritorious idea repulsive to people is to spoon-feed it to them. The surest way to give an idea an appeal out of all proportion to its merit is to give it the lure of the forbidden.
No wonder the Koreans are up in arms about dead men in Koguryo and apathetic about live ones in the North Korean gulag.
I say let the Koreans say, read, watch, and burn whatever they damn well please. Government ought to be with the consent of the governed, and if the governed lack the wisdom to govern themselves, the nanny state can’t guarantee their survival anyway.
Simon’s China and East Asia Briefing: 30th Nov 2004
The following is a digest of highlights from the past month’s Asia by Blog series over at simonworld.mu.nu. The round-up has four key areas of focus: China, Taiwan Hong Kong (Politics, Economy lifestyle, History sport culture, Information), Kore…
It’s people like you that are the problem in this country.
gambling
Take your time to check some information about gambling slot machines
estrin d diet pill
You may find it interesting to take a look at the pages dedicated to d diet estrin pills
Rating diet pills
Take your time to check some helpful info dedicated to snorting diet pills