Dominating airwaves

The Korea Times

The Korea Times

Opinion

Mon, December 4, 2023 | 06:46

Editorial

Dominating airwaves

Posted : 2023-06-15 16:40

Updated : 2023-06-15 18:37

Public broadcasters must be better, leaner and neutral

In Korea in the early 1980s, when the clock struck nine o'clock each and every evening, general-turned-president, Chun Doo-hwan, would invariably be on the nation's TV screens.

People called it "Ding Chun News."

Korean TV has come a long way since then. However, one thing that has not changed is the ruling elite's wish to control public broadcasters.

There was little difference between conservatives and progressives in this regard. Whenever political power changed, governments would invariably reshuffle the top executives of the Korea Broadcasting System (KBS) and often toyed with the idea of changing the subscription fee collection system.

On Wednesday, the Korea Communication Commission (KCC) took the first step to collect license fees for KBS separately from electricity bills. The shift from the near-universal charge ― of the past three decades ― to a separate bill, will sharply reduce KBS' revenue, potentially crippling its ability to function as a public broadcaster.

All KBS executives and employees, senior journalists and even viewer's organizations oppose the move. Objectively speaking, however, the Yook Suk Yeol government does what progressives once called for ― making the public broadcaster more neutral. Unlike in the past, the conservative government has actually pushed forward with this aim this time. Why? KBS and another public broadcaster, MBC, are led by what it considers "progressive" journalists.

Presidential secretaries attribute Yoon's low approval rating to "hostile news media outlets," including public broadcasters, instead of attributing it to the president. Still, the nation's three largest dailies, as well as three of the four major cable channels, are conservative outlets supporting the incumbent leader and his administration. Therefore, the presidential office should find the reasons for his low popularity in the unpopular policies he has made. Progressive or conservative, public or private, the media's role is to scrutinize closely and criticize where necessary, not praise those in power unreservedly.

When Yoon took office in May last year, he promised to accept even bitter criticism from the media. What he has done in the past year is far from it. His aides excluded a journalist from the presidential plane (paid for with taxpayers' money) after a critical report, sued several journalists for slander, and had police raid the newsroom of MBC for the first time in history. Reporters Without Borders lowered Korea's press freedom index by four notches, placing it in the 47th spot this year. The fall in press freedom is more painful as it comes under a president who puts "freedom" above all else.

However, the attempt to change KBS is not entirely unwarranted.

The public broadcaster has been criticized for being bloated and ineffective in its operations, specifically, the high salaries received by its workers and low output. Many Koreans, especially millennials and Gen-Z, do not watch TV, let alone public broadcasters, in this era of Netflix and YouTube. Public broadcasters from Europe to Asia are attacked for their poor content and political partisanship.

Nevertheless, the government's ongoing job is not appropriate, legally and procedurally. Officials base their decisions on perfunctory opinion polls and push for their goals by using presidential decrees, instead of changing the law.

Yet, the Supreme Court recognized the necessity and efficiency of the integrated license fee collection system in 2016. The Constitutional Court also defined the TV license stamp as a "special charge for public purposes." If the Yoon administration goes ahead with its plan, KBS will have no option but to resort to advertising like its commercial rivals.

The government must put the reform of public broadcasters to a public debate. Participants representing all walks of life should present views on all aspects of public broadcasters, including whether and why they should exist. If public broadcasters fail to persuade people about their self-reform plans, Korea could consider overhauling its broadcasting system.

For now, Korea needs an excellent public broadcaster or two. It needs disaster broadcasts, for instance, during floods, pandemics and other public programs. The stations must also criticize the government and big businesses, and be free from political and economic influence. If ― and that's a very big if ― these public broadcasters are run far more efficiently and more neutrally, then Koreans can even fund their operation with taxes.

All this explains why the government must stop its half-baked attempt and seek public consensus.