Jung Min-ho has worked as a staff writer at The Korea Times since 2012, mostly covering social and political issues. He currently belongs to the Politics & City Desk where he covers topics such as health, labor and human rights. Prior to joining the team, he was responsible for covering North Korea and sports. His article about a biosecurity breach of Middle East respiratory syndrome won him an award from the Korea Science Journalists Association in 2016. He is also the co-author of the book, "Medical Pioneers of Korea" (2019). He served as the head of the international relations committee at the Journalists Association of Korea from 2021 to 2023.
Q&A Korea's 'fake news' law is in force — what you need to know
Leaders of the conservative People Power Party wear black masks in protest of the new “fake news” law during a press conference at the National Assembly in Seoul, Monday. Newsis
By Jung Min-ho
Korea’s revised Information and Communications Network Act, also dubbed the “fake news” law, came into force on Tuesday, reshaping how unlawful information is handled online.
Under the new rules, “false or manipulated” information is defined as content whose whole or partial substance is untrue, or altered in a way that misleads audiences into believing it is factual. The revision also introduced a new category of illegal hate or discriminatory expression which covers posts that incite violence, discrimination or hatred against individuals or groups based on traits such as race, nationality or gender.
Amid concerns over vague legal definitions and potential conflicts with constitutional free-speech protections, the state-run Korea Media and Communications Commission (KMCC) provided answers to frequently asked questions to address key issues.
Q. What should I do if I suffer harm from false or manipulated information?
A. Anyone who encounters information suspected of being false or manipulated can file a report with a large online service provider, including the location of the content, reasons for the complaint, any supporting evidence and contact information for follow-up. Additionally, you may bring a civil claim for compensation and if the poster is a large-scale professional publisher of facts or opinions to the general public, victims may seek enhanced damages.
Q. If a YouTuber with 150,000 subscribers spreads false or manipulated information in their videos, does the account holder fall under the aggravated damages rules?
A. Yes. A YouTuber who has posted at least three videos in the past three months, earns income from those posts and has 100,000 or more subscribers or an average of 100,000 views over that period can be subject to enhanced civil damages if they intentionally distribute illegal false or manipulated information that causes harm.
Q. What steps must online platforms take when they receive a complaint?
A. If a large service provider finds that the reported content violates its own policies, it may delete or block the content or remove the account to prevent further spread. When it is hard to determine the facts, the provider can work with an external fact‑checking body and rely on its decision. Whenever the provider deletes or blocks content or an account, it must notify both the complainant and the poster of the result, explain the reasons and inform the parties that they may file an objection within six months and seek dispute mediation over the decision.
Q. Because the government supports fact-checking bodies through the transparency center, critics say those groups may be susceptible to political pressure. Is that the case?
A. The government provides support through the transparency center. It does not intervene in fact-checkers’ choice of topics, their procedures or the substance of their work.
Q. What should I do if I see hate speech online?
A. Users who encounter suspected hate speech can report it to the relevant online platform or request a review by the KMCC. Reports should include the location, the reason for the complaint, why the content is considered hate speech and any supporting materials. If the KMCC concludes that the content is hate speech, it may demand corrective measures such as deletion or blocking of the material.
Q. What happens if a platform fails to take the required action?
A. If a large online platform does not fulfill its duty to delete or block hate-speech content, the KMCC may issue a corrective order. If the platform refuses to comply without legitimate reason, it can face criminal penalties under the Information and Communications Network Act.
Q. Will political criticism or satire also be regulated as hate speech?
A. No. The revised act is not intended to restrict political criticism, satire or the expression of diverse opinions. It targets only information that directly incites violence or discrimination against specific individuals or groups or foments hatred in a way that gravely undermines human dignity. In deciding whether a post is hate speech, authorities consider not just the words themselves but also the context, how it was created and its social impact, so merely causing offense is not enough for content to be treated as hate speech.
Q. If a news report on environmental issues becomes controversial, will the media outlet face enhanced damages?
A. In principle, no. To avoid curtailing press freedom, public-interest reporting is not subject to the enhanced damages system. In particular, reports that serve the public interest and were published on the basis that the outlet believed the information to be true at the time, with reasonable grounds for that belief, are not subject to enhanced damages. But if a lawsuit is filed, the final determination will rest with the court.
Q: To decide whether a report serves the public interest, it is important to decide the person covered is a public figure. Are entertainers considered public figures?
A. The scope of public figures has not yet been settled by social consensus, but the laws define them as people who hold public authority or public influence and are proper subjects of the public’s right to oversight and criticism. On this basis, it lists election candidates, heads of public institutions, certain high-ranking officials, confirmation-hearing nominees, party leaders, media executives and controlling figures in major conglomerates as public figures. Under these criteria, celebrities are not treated as public figures.