Spring Break
Controversial Reform in South Korea
Natalie Kim '12
Issue date: 9/30/09 Section: Opinion
In South Korea, heated political conflict and demonstrations are nothing new, but the National Assembly's July 22 passage of three Media Bills sparked particular outrage among lawmakers and the general public alike. Freedom of the press has long been a contested right in Korea, with violent crackdowns on student demonstrations under the Chun Doo-Hwan's Presidency from 1980 to 1988. The bills, which would privatize or expand the opportunity for private control over many of South Korea's major media outlets-including the nation's three major broadcast networks, the Yonhap news agency, and the internet-had politicians in the National Assembly in fistfights, with parliamentary leaders barred from entering the building and participating in the voting process.
As the centerpiece of President Lee Myung-bak's agenda, the bills are part of his administration's broader efforts to liberalize investment rules and privatize media corporations. Although print corporations traditionally were not allowed to own broadcast properties, and vice versa, in a practice known as cross-ownership, the new bill allows private-owned businesses and press corporations to own as much as 50% of national broadcast channels and 100% of channels solely devoted to news broadcasting. It abolishes existing limits on corporate ownership of satellite broadcast channels and loosens regulation concerning foreign ownership of broadcast channels. Although the Lee administration has yet to come up with a sales plan, it is expected that the majority of the stocks offered will be bought up relatively quickly.
Though the bills went largely unnoticed in the international scene, some foreign investors and analysts viewed the bills as a "test of the government's willingness to reduce its reach into the economy," according to one Wall Street Journal article. Like foreign investors who would welcome the increased reach into the Korean media market, President Lee and his Grand National Party (GNP) cite the free-market advantages and economic benefits the bills could bring, such as increased quality of reporting through heightened competition. Although between 3000 and 4000 trainees enter the media workforce each year, the number of jobs available are far too scant to meet that number, resulting in unemployment. The GNP points to excessive regulation in comparison to other OECD countries as choking business growth and emphasized in a memo that a solid business foundation was needed in order to be competitive internationally. Added opportunities for corporate investment in media companies would make more capital available to them, with the opportunity for more jobs to be created. Streamlining and downsizing former government agencies that controlled advertising would lead to increased media revenues.
As the centerpiece of President Lee Myung-bak's agenda, the bills are part of his administration's broader efforts to liberalize investment rules and privatize media corporations. Although print corporations traditionally were not allowed to own broadcast properties, and vice versa, in a practice known as cross-ownership, the new bill allows private-owned businesses and press corporations to own as much as 50% of national broadcast channels and 100% of channels solely devoted to news broadcasting. It abolishes existing limits on corporate ownership of satellite broadcast channels and loosens regulation concerning foreign ownership of broadcast channels. Although the Lee administration has yet to come up with a sales plan, it is expected that the majority of the stocks offered will be bought up relatively quickly.
Though the bills went largely unnoticed in the international scene, some foreign investors and analysts viewed the bills as a "test of the government's willingness to reduce its reach into the economy," according to one Wall Street Journal article. Like foreign investors who would welcome the increased reach into the Korean media market, President Lee and his Grand National Party (GNP) cite the free-market advantages and economic benefits the bills could bring, such as increased quality of reporting through heightened competition. Although between 3000 and 4000 trainees enter the media workforce each year, the number of jobs available are far too scant to meet that number, resulting in unemployment. The GNP points to excessive regulation in comparison to other OECD countries as choking business growth and emphasized in a memo that a solid business foundation was needed in order to be competitive internationally. Added opportunities for corporate investment in media companies would make more capital available to them, with the opportunity for more jobs to be created. Streamlining and downsizing former government agencies that controlled advertising would lead to increased media revenues.
Be the first to comment on this story