What Should Be Bottom for Nation's Parliamentary Democracy?

In producing what has now become a familiar parliamentary melee once again, the governing camp has just opened the door for big businesses and newspapers to run broadcasters.

The so-called media reform bills, despite the cosmetic raising of entry barriers to appease complaints from a minority faction within the ruling Grand National Party itself, will do little to prevent the nation's largest business groups and newspapers, or their consortia, from near-monopolizing the media market ― and public opinion.

Officials in the government and its party say Korea is the only OECD country that has prohibited the cross-ownership of newspapers and broadcasters. What they failed to say, however, is most advanced countries, including the United States and Germany, have set strict restrictions to keep a few media giants from holding sways on regional markets, which actually are as large as or larger than entire Korean markets.

Under the bills railroaded through the chaotic Assembly, the big-three, right-wing newspapers loyal to President Lee Myung-bak will be able to own 10- and 30-percent stakes in terrestrial and cable news networks, respectively. They bar dailies that have circulation amounting to 20 percent of the total market from jumping into the broadcasting business, though that scenario is meaningless, as there are no such papers now.

The governing camp stresses the need for diversifying news channels as well as for enhancing the industrial competitiveness by letting in big businesses and large papers. In purely industrial and cultural aspects, however, it is far too apparent that the domestic media market will suffer from excessive commercialism under the new environment, which will crowd out even what little remains of public broadcasting, turning TV sets into even more egregious idiot boxes.

There is some room in the collision over the media bills that can be interpreted as a struggle to make the domestic broadcasting environment more favorable to rival political camps and conflicting ideological groups. And the simultaneous strikes by the nation's three major network stations, the first in about a decade, can be seen as aimed at protecting their vested interests.

Yet, the governing camp's argument that the bills' passage was to keep a promise to the people is outrageous indeed, as various opinion polls showed that up to six in every 10 Koreans opposed their contents and an even greater percentage did not approve of their forceful legislation.

Even GNP lawmakers acknowledged the controversial bills have little to do with people's livelihoods, but the governing party rammed them through, even risking a violation of the National Assembly law by allegedly committing proxy voting and putting them to a vote even amid the lack of a quorum, triggering controversy about their legitimacy, which will likely lead to a drawn-out legal battle.

The biggest victims of the latest parliamentary brawl were bills related to livelihood, such as the revision of the Non-Regular Workers Protection Law, as opposition lawmakers are vowing to desert the Assembly to resume ``street politics.'' The GNP and probably Cheong Wa Dae should take responsibility for the consequent paralysis of state administration.

There seem to be few other choices than to supplement the approved bills in ways to further prevent the possibility of market monopoly to lure oppositionists to parliament. In the long run, that is also the only way Lee and the GNP can free themselves from the burden of turning the nation's parliamentary democracy backward.