Washington Post on Moon

By Lee Seong-hyon

“On first day in office, South Korean president talks about going to North,” read the headline of a Washington Post report. It was a prominent report about Moon Jae-in’s first speech at the National Assembly after he was just sworn in as the new president. In the craft of journalism, it is the headline that carries monumental importance. It is the “summary” of the news in one sentence. It sets the tenor of the news. It “frames” the entire article that follows. Moreover, busy readers often only skim this and move on, forming a quick idea of the matter at stake. In a nutshell, a title in journalism is like a first kiss. It is well remembered.

The Post’s arresting headline was successful in grabbing the attention of readers. But it also has opened up a useful debate about its fairness, because it insinuated a very important judgment about the new leader in South Korea and his emerging North Korea policy.

President Moon’s opponents have long marketed a public narrative that he was a “sympathizer” towards North Korea and would be “soft” on Pyongyang. They expressed fear that he would undermine the current U.N. sanctions on the North by unconditionally engaging Pyongyang. They used this assertion, importantly, to argue why Moon shouldn’t be elected commander-in-chief for the nation, which is under increasing nuclear and missile threats from North Korea. They also highlighted the fact that Moon formerly served as chief of staff and close aide to the late liberal president Roh Moo-hyun, who declared he would not “kowtow to the Americans.”

Against the backdrop, the Post’s headline perfectly feeds into the conservative narrative and reinforces the preconceived notion about President Moon and his policy on North Korea.

The problem is that in his speech, Moon talked about visiting the United States first; Beijing and Tokyo second; and then, lastly North Korea. Even then, on North Korea, he added that he would do so “under conducive conditions.”

The Post’s headline therefore could have been: “On first day in office, South Korean president talks about going to Washington.” It chose not to. The Post’s headline characterized Moon’s speech as if it was his manifesto to embrace North Korea instead.

Journalism students learn about “framing theory.” News is about “showing.” Framing is about “telling.” The motto of journalism is to show, not tell. The Post article could serve as a good example for classroom debates on whether it abandoned the practice of separating “news” from “opinion” in its stories.

Political journalism has long been criticized for strength in reinforcing conventional frames and weak in breaking them. In today’s commercialized journalism, the primary reason for doing so is due to marketing strategy based on the readers’ psychology. Simply put, readers read the newspaper to “confirm” what they already believe, rather than being challenged by something different.

When opening the newspaper in the morning with a cup of coffee, people want to confirm their political view is correct and move on with life. Nice and simple. A holy morning ritual. It gives one a sense of security and coherence to one’s world view. They don’t want to be challenged by encountering something “different” in the newspaper that would force them to “correct” their world view. Life is already busy.

The situation sometimes creates tension between the reporter and the editor. Often it is the editor at the desk who doesn’t welcome the “new” discovery by the reporter on the scene. Going with the old flow is a safe bet. Readers don’t want a complicated story. Newspaper space is limited too. Unfortunately, this also deprives Moon of a chance to be second guessed.

During the presidential campaign, Moon said he would use both “carrots and the stick” toward North Korea. He also repeatedly emphasized the importance of the Seoul-Washington alliance structure. Skeptics largely brushed it aside as mere campaign rhetoric. Hong Jun-pyo, a conservative contender even claimed that Moon’s election would speed up “North-Koreanization” of South Korea.

North Korea’s latest missile test was certainly a test for Moon in this regard, but also an opportunity. Moon declared that there won’t be any “unconditional dialogue” with North Korea, brushing aside skepticism that he may be “soft” on North Korea. He also publicly affirmed his commitment to Seoul’s traditional alliance with Washington. Yet, the framing war against Moon may not be over yet.

Lee Seong-hyon, Ph.D., is a research fellow at the Sejong Institute. Reach him at sunnybbsfs@gmail.com