5 Lobbies Pressure Portals to Help Big 3 Papers
Daum Asks Commission Whether Online Boycott Drives Violate Law
By Kim Hyun-cheol
Staff Reporter
Five leading business lobbies have asked major Web portals not to allow online postings denouncing companies for advertising in the big three conservative newspapers.
The big three of The Chosun Ilbo, Dong-a Ilbo and Joongang Ilbo, which account for three quarters of newspaper subscriptions in Korea, are being targeted by netizens for their negative views against the candlelight protests triggered by the Lee Myung-bak administration's decision to open up markets to U.S. beef.
Companies advertising in these papers are facing a consumer boycott against their products, forcing them to cancel ad pledges in many cases.
The alliance of the Federation of Korean Industries (FKI), the Korean Chamber of Commerce & Industry, the Korean Federation of Small and Medium Businesses, the Korea Employers Federation and the Korea International Trade Association sent a memorandum Wednesday to six Internet companies, requesting ``more monitoring on behavior hampering companies' normal marketing activities.''
Daum, one of the recipients of the memorandum, requested the Korea Communications Commission on the same day to determine if the online boycott campaign violates the law.
The memorandum said some Internet users are instigating a rebellion bashing the newspapers by posting a target list of companies inserting advertisements in them and making protest phone calls to those companies.
``Consequently, the companies are having a particularly hard times just because of advertising in those newspapers," the memorandum said.
The groups also said it is "definitely an act of giving them extra trouble when they are already suffering enough from surging oil prices and the downturn of the domestic market."
The FKI said the portal sites should take immediate measures to keep the malicious messages from prevailing. "Advertisement is an important marketing means of enterprises. So such threats are a serious threat to the market economy," the nation's biggest business lobby said.
Criticism by active Internet users has been continuing of the newspapers with regards to their recent coverage of the public protest nationwide including candlelight vigils. Progressive Web surfers have constantly condemned them for reporting biased articles raising ungrounded suspicions on ``wire-pullers'' behind the endless line of candles, as well as denunciating the online protesters as ``rumormongers.''
The action of business advocating bodies, however, is meeting a serious backlash from anguished netizens and civic groups, who are referring to them as simply "going over-the-top."
All the entrepreneurs open their contract lines for customers' feedback, and posting the already-open sources on online message boards doesn't infringe on any laws unless more private information is disclosed there, they say.
Some legal professionals also pointed out several terms in the memorandum were used arbitrarily which could provoke interpretations in a certain way. "The memorandum is requesting a ban on consumers' exchange of information and thus is not appropriate," said Kim Ki-joong, a member of the Lawyers for a Democratic Society.
"Usually online messages can cause legal problems when involved in libel, obscurity or national security. But I doubt if it can be applied to consumers' boycotts like this. Even though there could be illegalities on the results of acting on those messages, it's still not right to seek ways to block online expressions of opinion."
Feuds between newspapers and the general public trace back to the 1990s, when rapidly spreading broadband networks nationwide made it easier for the people to give their opinion on various issues, especially political.
Controversy on attempts for the impeachment of former President Roh Moo-hyun, who substantially owes his presidency to online crowds, critically triggered conflicts against those influential and conservative newspapers.