Well, children, today is the day when the National Election Commission ban on writing messages in support or opposed to specific presidential contenders [Korea Herald] goes into effect:
A person who violates the election laws could face a prison term of up to two years and a fine of 4 million won, it said. “Not all people writing those kind of messages would be punished. It is important whether the messages in question intend to influence the election,” an NEC official said.
“So far, writing messages on portal sites supporting or opposing specific contenders were allowed. But the act is prohibited from today. Similar acts on personal homepages or blogs are also disallowed,” it said.
Good luck enforcing that one, especially when Korea’s top law enforcer, President Roh, is so enamored with the nation’s election laws that when he’s not violating them [Chosun Ilbo, English], he’s seeking their repeal [JURIST].
25 Comments
John Adams said that in a “Republick,” the “natural Aristocra[t] among men” is one who “commands or influences true Votes in Society.”
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu.....15s62.html
This Korean law is an example of egalitarianism run amok, and an illustration of why a society can have Liberty or Equality, but not both.
I’m just curious how this differs from me taking a megaphone out on the street and shouting senseless slogans of support. Oh, wait, this would actually constitute political discourse, which means that people have to convince others of their opinions based on the merits of their arguements. And, as The Western Confucian just pointed out, that would be inegalitarian. You see, anyone can shout into a megaphone, but it takes a special sort to be rational.
Just for the record, I think that Lee Myoung Bak’s canal plan is a bad idea and I hope that his 747 initiative is just pandering to the masses, because if put in place it would cause runaway inflation.
Come on National Election Commission, take the bait! Track me down! Arrest me, fine me and jail me!
ecorn LOL
while agreeing with the first two posters, i also find myself thinking that the corollary to this is the litigiousness of the US system…
it’s not precisely an example of “egalitarianism run amok”, as suggested above.
rather, it’s the case of laudible korean efforts to stamp out corruption and other ugly old habits surrounding the electoral system being taken to an ugly extreme.
it’s definitely unfortunate, expecially when you consider that the people who are ruling on this, the NEC, is basically a bunch of old people who don’t really understand the potential of new media to engage the populace.
So, does this ban apply to THIS “foreign” blog — to its writers and to its commentariat, no matter where they are based? Can Robert get in trouble for permitting posts here that opinionate on specific contenders?
Forget about censorship and human rights: what if a whistle-blower has evidence that a candidate is corrupt? What if another’s policies are whacked? They could still become president? That’s messed up.
sanshinseon, I don’t think the law applies to non-citizens. Besides, can you imagine the international incident that it would cause if they tried?
It is unlikely an English blog would be thought to have enough influence over Korean public opinion to matter enough to be prosecuted, of course, but legally the answer to that question is yes.
I recall during the Cindy Sheehan visit several commenters noted that foreigners are forbidden to partake in political activity. Yet, wasn’t there an election somewhat recently were resident foreigners were allowed to vote?
Where this blog is domiciled (if outside Korea) doesn’t protect those who comment from within Korea.
Do not vote for #1 on the ballot!
Stop that.
“Yet, wasn’t there an election somewhat recently were resident foreigners were allowed to vote?”
Those with an F-5 can vote in local elections but not the presidential ones.
It seems that there are already backlashes from this. http://www.donga.com/fbin/outp.....mp;top20=1
I just love the guy who reports himself guilty and starts writing about the candidates.
I wonder if Roh Moo Hyun doesn’t have a diabolical plan to destroy the Korean Presidency with his antics in the run-up to the election. He has in the past insisted that Korea should transition to a prime-ministerial system, but the GNP rebuffed that effort. Roh knows that the next election will reject the Uri Party nominee, or the nominee of the “progressive forces” since Uri has so discredited itself, or anyone formerly associated with this administration, or anyone who has been photographed with Roh.
Since he knows that the rightist candidate will breeze into office out of backlash against the Roh-Nothings and their woeful incompetence, perhaps the President of Korea intends to make the office of the Presidency into such a bag of shit that his successor will be crippled.
Brendon, Roh’s escapades have more to do with the use or control of information (IMHO) since South Korea is steadily engaged with certain parties in an information war. The people that can best use or control what information channels there are (including entertainment) can shape Korea more to their liking.
One should not forget that Roh was greatly helped to become president by the use of information technology (SMS, web).
Since when did the exercise of the right of free speech become a form of corruption and other ugly old habits of Korean electioneering?
So much for Korea’s maturity as a democratic polity.
“it’s the case of laudible korean efforts to stamp out corruption and other ugly old habits surrounding the electoral system being taken to an ugly extreme”
It may be a deliberate attempt to further stifle interest in the democratic process.
I would like to say that there are a few misconceptions that South Korean rightists such as the Chosun Ilbo have deliberately spreaded to discredit him, even to the non-Korean communities:
1. “Roh became the President mostly for his online supporters.”
2. “Roh took advantage of the anti-American sentiment in his presidential election campaign.”
3. “Roh has socialist ideas or is pro-North Korea.”
Thanks for the Nosamo perspective, French Quarter. While I don’t know whether or not the online support was crucial to Roh’s campaign success, your denial of the last two comes straight out of the “Big Lie” playbook.
#19
Then, how do you know if 2 or 3 is true?
Correction: #19 -> #18.
You are incorrect, regarding your first point of contention “French Quarter”. Though Hanara deserved to lose, the use of newer forms of technology enabled Roh to pull ahead of the competition. I refer you to an article by Kim Shin Dong, an associate professor of communication at Hallym University, Korea, and Director for the iCat Institute:
You can read Kim’s article here. Though the Chosun Ilbo is subject to its own bias in reporting the news and sometimes highly questionable reporting, they are most definitely not as allergic to truth or rational thought as other media outlets in South Korea apparently are. Castigating the Chosun as being “rightist” is the cry of the disingenuous ideologue.
R. Elgin, I was following the 2002 presidential election with a microscope. I know that, even on the day of the election, there were numerous posts on the BBSs asking readers to contact their acquaintances to vote for Roh. They might or might not be the Nosamo. Lee Hoe-Chang also had his own support group, “Chang Sarang.” They also posted support messages in all kinds of boards on the Internet. At that time, the majority of the young people supported Roh, and virtually all of them HAPPENED TO BE the Internet users. Despite this, we don’t know the scale of the impact of these online activities on the election result. They DID affect the election result. We, including Kim above, do not know their scale and extent, however, although they were impressive and even reported abroad. That’s why I used the word, “mostly,” in the sentence that I denied. There was no single entity to control or use the information (channel), if I have understood your post #14 correctly.
The Chosun Ilbo has gained its market share mostly in 1980s by supporting authoritarian military governments. There used to be political persecution and illegal arrests and killings in 1980s. There also was “Kwangju Protest” in 1980 where more than 200 people were killed. The Chosun called Chun as the savior of South Korea and described the victims in Kwangju as riots. Many people were sacrificed under the name of anti-communism. Anti-communism was a easy means to suppress political opposites. (Of course, I’m anti-communist.) Selling anti-communism/national security, the Chosun has been a strongest supporter of the military governments. Actually, the Chosun columnist Kim Dae-Jung, who happens to have the same name with the former President Kim Dae-Jung, said that the Chosun itself creates the power. Hannara is the direct successor of Shin-Hankook Party, Minja Party, and Minjung Part, which Chun Doo-Hwan established right after the coup in 1980. The Chosun has been with them all the way, and too many people were sacrificed for them.
“French”, from what reports I read and from what I have heard, there is a long-term effort by certain parties to gain access to and influence over the newer forms of media. You write “There was no single entity to control or use the information (channel) . . . ” only in past tense. This last year saw the attempt of the Roh administration to “unite all communication authorities under one roof by forming a new “super-committee”, supposedly to better regulate media convergence”.
I refer you to an earlier thread not to mention this Joongang Ilbo related article.
Now that’s the pot calling the kettle black.
I also noticed that the original reference articles for the “revolution” thread no longer work but they are here:
Proposed “super-committee” met with opposition
and
Unification planned for broadcasting overseers
The Korea Herald ran a new article on this today, here: https://www.koreaherald.co.kr/archives/result_contents.asp?id=200706250037&query=election
I hate the way the NEC spokesperson tries to pin this on sticking to the letter of the law, but I’m encouraged by the fact that people are actually posting messages of opposition.
I have a feeling that the messages posted by locals won’t have much effect. The law won’t get revised until after the NY Times runs a story about it and the election officials get embarrassed.
This part confuses me: “Strictly complying with the law, even mentioning a party or a candidate’s name either online or offline should be banned starting from 180 days prior to the elections, which will be held December 19.”
Does that mean that I can no longer discuss politics with my coworkers? Is there such a thing as Korean democracy?