“What if there were punitive grandchildren during Park Geun-hye?

“If there was a punitive damage compensation system during the Park Geun-hye regime, would the media have been able to properly dig into Gukjeong Nongdan? It’s dizzy.”

Kim Dong-hoon, the head of the Korean Journalists Association (from the Hankyoreh), said, “I think the media is the most responsible for the background of the punitive damage compensation system,” and “The punitive damage compensation system that can punish even good faith misinformation will greatly shrink reporters. “I will.”

Chairman Kim, at the office of the Korean Journalists Association, <오마이뉴스>I met with and expressed a strong opposition to the’punitive damage compensation system for media’ recently promoted by the Democratic Party. Not only the Korean Journalists Association to which Chairman Kim belongs, but also most media organizations such as the Korea Newspaper Association, the Korea Newspaper Broadcasting Editors Association, and the National Press Workers’ Union have expressed their opposition.

In early February, the Democratic Party announced’Six Bills for Media Reform’. Among them, the’Amendment of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communication Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc. (the information and communication network law below)’ initiated by Representative Yoon Young-chan is the hottest potato. It is a bill called the so-called punitive damages against the media.

According to the bill, “In the event that a user of an information and communications network has suffered damages such as defamation due to the production or distribution of illegal information or information of content that defames others by revealing false facts intentionally or by gross negligence, compensation for damages to the user “You can claim,” and “the court can determine the amount of damages to the extent that it does not exceed three times the amount of damages.”

In other words, if a problem is caused by intentional or gross negligence of information and communication network users, the perpetrator can compensate up to three times the victim’s damage. The Democratic Party plans to include media and portal sites as well as single-person media, YouTubers, and SNS users in the scope of’users’.

Chairman Kim recalled, “The bill of Rep. Yoon Young-chan is not much different from the amendment to the Commercial Law issued by the Ministry of Justice in September 2020. It caused controversy at the time, and eventually the Democratic Party took a step toward folding it by reflecting public opinion in the media.” “At that time, what we paid as an alternative was contained in the bill of Rep. Pil-mo Jeong. The most common sources of fake news are single-person media and YouTubers, so we wanted to revise the Information and Communication Network Act so that they could be scrutinized with tweezers.” If you even target the portal site, you’re burning it very quickly to catch some bedbugs.”

The interviews with Chairman Kim are summarized below in one question and one answer.

“Let’s catch bedbugs and burn them for a while”

-The core of the Democratic Party’s six bills for media reform is the amendment to the Information and Communication Network Act, initiated by Representative Yoon Young-chan. It is a so-called’punitive damage compensation system for the media’, and the Korean Journalists Association presented an opinion against it.

“The bill for Rep. Yoon Young-chan is not much different from the amendment to the Commercial Law issued by the Ministry of Justice in September last year. It caused controversy at the time and eventually the Democratic Party took a step toward folding it by reflecting public opinion in the media industry. Since the most common sources of fake news are single-person media and YouTubers, the content was to revise the Information and Communication Network Act so that they could be searched for with tweezers, and if the media and portal sites were the targets, they would burn them for a while to catch some bedbugs. to be.

There is also a decisive flaw in the punitive damages system. It is double punishment and over-legislation. There is a media arbitration committee in Korea, and both civil and criminal lawsuits are possible. It is not right to make punitive damages here. And the criterion for judging that it is’malicious fake news’ is bound to be ambiguous. For example, if someone is branded as a follower or pro-Japanese, it can be interpreted arbitrarily, whether it is factual or an opinion. And there are a lot of’good faith misinformation’. Justice mistake.”

-Are you referring to the report that the reason for illegal sculpture occurred in the trial?

“Yes. In particular, even the reason for illegal sculpture is not well recognized in the trials these days. There was a reporter who worked hard at Gukjeong Nongdan four years ago and wrote an article on suspicion of corruption in the cultural world. He paid 75 million won and was convicted of a criminal. If punitive damages were applied to this, what kind of reporter could monitor the power?”

-There are actually victims who suffer serious damage from misinformation and malicious comments. As the rate of consumption of news on the Internet increases, its severity is increasing.

“Malicious comments are, in fact, related to the regulation of portal sites, rather than the responsibility of the media. We must gather wisdom about fake news. We agree with the need to regulate by laws and institutions. In a situation where media credibility is degraded by fake news, This is because the media is also a victim of fake news, so the Korean Journalists Association also used tweezers to offer a good alternative to fake news, which is represented by the law of Rep. Pil-mo Jeong, but does not discuss this and returns to the punitive damage compensation system without discussing it. I am very sorry for my appearance.”

-You mentioned one-person media and YouTubers as the target of Balbonsaekwon, but some of them play a positive role. Conversely, there are many people who play a positive role in the media, but others do not. Can the people be persuaded by claiming that only the media should be removed from the punitive damage compensation system?

“The press still works with gatekeeping. When a reporter writes an article, it goes through at least two steps through the confirmation of the manager and the director. Important articles take more steps. Single media and YouTubers do not, so much more. Fake news is produced more frequently, and it is necessary to regulate it first and observe its effect, but including all the existing media at once will only bring back a backlash from the media world, and this is also a problem related to freedom of expression. If punitive damages are in place, reporters will try to avoid writing dangerous articles, and controversial reports may not be covered at all, reducing the space that the socially weak can lean on. Naturally, surveillance of power is also inevitably reduced.”

“Realistic legal use of the judiciary for media victims”

-At present, some point out that remedies for victims of media reports are not appropriate. For example, it is criticized that the effectiveness of the media arbitration committee or litigation is poor.

“This is often because of the court ruling. The court has been generous. If the current law was applied properly, the story of punitive damages may not have come out. Of course, there must be a clear self-introspection of the media. The media itself has to take responsibility for why the media credibility is now this way. It requires self-examination of the media and a realistic legal use of the judiciary.”

-Rep. Yoon Young-chan’s bill makes’intentional or gross negligence’ as a condition for compensation. In the previous law of Congressman Chung Cheong-rae, it was based on a case in which personal rights were violated by malicious reports. What do you think of this claim to prevent infringement of freedom of expression with these standards?

“The phrase’malicious’ in the Chungcheong-rae bill was also interpreted in various ways, and it was pointed out that the regulation was ambiguous. In addition, the bill of Rep. Young-chan Yoon, which can punish even misinformation in good faith by adding’significant negligence’, will greatly shrink reporters. .”

-Rep. Yoon Young-chan’s bill caused controversy by placing the burden of proving intentional or gross negligence on the’person who caused the damage’.

“There is a high possibility that you will be under pressure to disclose the reporter for proof, but is the protection of the reporter at the core of the reporter’s professional ethics. In particular, in the case of confidential documents or reports related to North Korea, how will you disclose the reporter?”

-What do you think is the reason for the low media credibility?

“I think it’s because of the confirmation bias. There is an atmosphere among reporters, “Will the non-partisan articles really sell?” So, even if it’s not even fake news, articles that are constantly over-painted. The essence is 30, but 60, 70, 80. Not only the press, which is the producer of the news, but also the consumer is responsible for it. The people who consume the news are enthusiastic about the news again. The consuming people are driven by such news, and the press becomes more stimulating. The vicious cycle repeats as you write articles. It’s just like the reason that junk foods are sold well and continue to be produced.”

“Moon Jae-in government’s media reform, no policy is policy”

-What do you think is the solution to such a diagnosis?

“As much as regulation and punishment are important, I think that encouragement and support are also necessary. Recently, the morale of journalists working hard in the front line has fallen. There are a lot of reporters who want to leave for a different job instead of a job change in the media. For the first time in a commemorative poll, the satisfaction with reporters fell below 50%.. President Moon Jae-in’s press pledges are very good, but they are not being put into practice, so various media and social groups including the Korea Journalists Association in January In the early days, the Democratic Party held a press conference to fulfill its media pledges.” In the case of the improvement of the governance structure of public broadcasting, which the Democratic Party talked about during the opposition party, any Democrat with 180 seats now can promote it immediately. Isn’t there a whirlpool over the EBS presidential position?

The Special Law for Local Newspaper Development Support is still a special law and has not been converted to a regular law. During the Roh Moo-hyun administration, the related budget was 40 billion won, but now it is only 8.5 billion won. In addition, a media reform committee should be created to ensure that the media can function properly, head-to-head in it, but there is also no plan. The same goes for the press room issue. During the Roh Moo-hyun administration, a very epoch-making proposal came out called the’plan to advance coverage support’. It was at the end of the regime and it was not implemented properly because it came out of a situation where communication with the media was not available, but the system itself was very good. There has also been a problem with the prosecution’s press room recently, but the media and the government must come together on this issue. The right direction is to switch from the press room system to the briefing room system, but to do so, the government, the owner of the government building, should take action rather than the media that is tied up by a cartel.

Now, the government is putting its hands on media reform to the extent that the story of’no policy is policy’ comes out. The government and the ruling party have to take care of these things and make an effort for a virtuous cycle of news, but it is frustrating to talk about punitive damages.”

-What do you think of the claim that punitive damages should be introduced preemptively to prevent existing damage and avoid low media credibility?

“I don’t think it’s a good idea to leave the existing problems to the market principle. There must be a remedy for those who have been damaged by media reports, but as I said earlier, I think it can be controlled by the current laws and institutions. There is only one intention: I hate the media. Such a sentiment is reflected in the word punishment, but it is difficult to make a law with feelings for punishment. The liberal supporters are far more in favor of the punitive damages system than the conservative supporters. I know. But when I think about the change of power, it’s dizzying. If there was a punitive damage compensation system during the Park Geun-hye administration, would the media have been able to properly dig into Gukjeong Nongdan? Who could properly criticize the power and jump in bravely?”

-What do you think is the top priority for desirable media reform?

“Many people agree with media reform, but everyone is frustrated with where to start. That’s why I think the Media Reform Committee is the answer. People with various ideas in the committee can gather and implement reform plans one by one. The improvement of the governance structure of public broadcasters mentioned above can only be done if the Democratic Party is willing to do so. It will be different when entering the bathroom and when exiting, but I hope to proceed.”

-Is there any last word you want to emphasize?

“I think the media’s responsibility is the biggest behind the story of the punitive damage compensation system. I want to emphasize once again that the media’s self-reflection comes first. Meanwhile, I want those who consume news to be wary of confirmation bias. To this end, how to pick good news for news consumers, and media literacy education is very necessary.”