The on-going war in media influence and control continues with a small mob of candle protesters sitting in front of KBS. Naturally, they want LMB’s appointed head of the Broadcasting and Communications Commission to resign.
I love how one mad poster wrote on Daum:
Lee Myung-bak is appointing only his closest people as the heads of media outlets. It’s a clear attempt to control the media.
Yikes! Apparently “mad cow disease” affects the memory as well. How quickly we forget Roh’s attempts to curb the media and create a presidential appointee to oversea new broadcast media. Also how about the current attempt to undermine the credibility of the three main newspapers, leaving only leftist and other dubious pseudo-news sites as allegedly legitimate sources of information?
It seems that while everyone is on the look-out for phantom mad cow disease, the chicken thieves are busy, sneaking into the back of the hen house…
{ 15 comments… read them below or add one }
With do respect, Elgin, but there’s a “current attempt to undermine the credibility of the country’s three main newspapers.” The credibility of said newspapers has long been held in doubt by a significant portion of the population. The reason why non-traditional “psudo-news sites,” as you put them, have attained the influence they have is because the mainstream press has at best ignored and at worst misrepresenting the views and issues they express. You don’t have to agree with what what the netizens are saying to sympathize with their frustration with the Cho-Jung-Dong. It works the other way around, too. People watch Fox News because the NYT and WaPo spent most of their time crusading against Republican presidents. Sure, the quality of news in the NYT and WaPo is probably 10 times that of Fox News, but people know political bias when they smell it, at which point they’ll read or watch the bullshit that more closely conforms with their views.
At least Japan has the Asahi Shimbun to help balance things out. What does Korea have? The Hankyoreh? The Kyunghyang? Seoul Sinmun?
Without trying to defend Roh Mu-hyun’s policies/activities in office as it pertains to media management, is it really relevant to bring it up? It seems that if a president is indeed engaging in cronyism in appointments to media posts, and the public doesn’t like it, it’s a valid criticism. Just because the guy before you was an ass about something doesn’t mean you should expect to get away with it. Likewise, if the public wises up to something, the fact that the didn’t recognise it/turned a blind eye previously doesn’t invalidate the complaint.
korea is so **** it is laughable. what a joke. i don’t know how you people live there. (edited for probity)
“Just because the guy before you was an ass about something doesn’t mean you should expect to get away with it. Likewise, if the public wises up to something, the fact that the didn’t recognise it/turned a blind eye previously doesn’t invalidate the complaint.”
That’s true, Pixel, but I think Elgin is pointing out that such behavior is considered acceptable if it’s done by people you agree with, as the candlelight nuts do with Roh, whereas it’s positively evil and despicable if done by your enemies. This seems a very common situation in Korea (with the right and the left).
In other words, where were these protesters when Roh was monkeying around with the press much more blatantly just a short time ago?
As Robert wrote:
I agree with you Robert. Mainstream media in Korea has sabotaged its own credibility by allowing such strong bias towards big money and certain political cliques. The big three need a shake up in hopes that they will develop a better sense of their role to inform society with as little bias as possible.
Despite the big three’s flaws, to blatantly substitute rumor, innuendo and gossip for legitimate facts and intelligent discussion of events is far worse, IMHO, because inciting and encouraging “mob justice” mentality ultimately leads to violence.
Remember the Maine?
Read this idiotic article which says UDP is in trouble for not leading the charge against “President Lee Myung-bak’s mismanagement of the nation”.
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/ww.....25832.html
——–
“Analysts say that a power struggle inside the governing Grand National Party (GNP) and the diminished role of the largest opposition United Democratic Party (UDP) might be two core factors explaining the disappearance of parliamentary politics in a key agenda facing the nation. ”
——-
Factional infightings we know about.. but here I thought the government is not functioning because the UDP and DLP are boycotting the National Assembly because they didn’t get what they want.
The next thing this newspaper will print is how Lee’s government policies have failed to bring growth to the country.
While the lefties are busy sabotaging the government so that it can’t do anything, world raw material crisis is clobbering Korea’s economy.
With trading terms worsening everyday, in no time, S.Korea may face another 1997 financial crisis, while the assholes rule the streets.
And add to all the labor unions scheduled to strike in coming days. Entire Korea Inc is nothing but protests and factional fighting. More and more I like the Singapore style one party, no unions system. This democracy thing is unsuitable for Korean minds.
“the NYT and WaPo spent most of their time crusading against Republican presidents.”
I don’t seem to remember them spending most of their time doing that. I do remember the Times apologizing for not being critical enough about our Republican president’s evidence in the lead up to the war.
“I do remember the Times apologizing for not being critical enough about our Republican president’s evidence in the lead up to the war.”
How much of the coverage of the NYT or WaPo is positive towards Bush and how much is negative. I’d venture to say that some is neutral, but a good deal is/was negative with very little positive. Overall, definitely not supportive of Bush or Republicans.
“Overall, definitely not supportive of Bush or Republicans.”
Of course not. Just like, say, Wall Street Journal was not supportive of Clinton and wouldn’t be of Obama.
And, in addition to apologizing for not being critical enough of the Iraq war evidence, they have full time conservative columnsits and opinion pieces. (Good luck finding that in the Hankyurae.)
But this nonsense “the NYT and WaPo spent most of their time crusading against Republican presidents” is just dumb. It’s just as dumb when people say the opposite about conservative papers.
#8: I’ve been saying this for awhile… When Bush entered Iraq for the purpose of “spreading freedom” and people who cited this got my simple answer, “do they want freedom?”
…everywhere that Western Democratic countries have interfered with the natural evolution of governments have resulted in mostly dictatorial or anarchic travesties that call themselves “civilized democracies.”
South Korea, Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan, others come to mind as examples…
…though exceptions exist too but all I wonder if India and Japan are really good examples of this and how the future will turn out.
Cuba is not an example of “western countries having interfered” unless you want to go back to the Spanish-American War up until Castro took power. Also South Korea is still in a (suspended) state of war and is quite unique in its predicament.
This topic is also drifting way off course . . .
I was going back to the Spanish-American War. The effects of forcing democracy on a unprepared country can backfire slowly or quickly, but rarely not at all. Cuba is a poor example but a historical one. I’d like to sample all non-Western countries as unprepared for democracy but then I’d be labeled as racist whitey, huh?
And the topic didn’t drift. The comments did as they most usually do. Your entry was nice. I just didn’t feel like commenting on it. Especially since snow’s #4 was so dead-on on with my feelings regarding media bias.
Journalists, Editors, and Media CEOs vote. Therefore, it is likely they have opinions (which may or not be for sale). Human beings have a dirty habit of allowing their politics to mix with their jobs, especially when the party they love or the party they hate is in power. What else is to say?
@ snow-
I can see your reading of it, and from R. Elgin’s further comments I’d say I misinterpreted the mood of the piece to be a little more unbalanced against “the left” than intended. Thanks for the clarification/correction!
Ah, for better tone of voice in text.
You must log in to post a comment.