There is much hot debate over the enforcement ordinance of the Newspaper Law announced by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism. Those who oppose it warn of the danger that it would infringe on newspaper autonomy. Yet the autonomy of the press is meaningful only when the public nature of the press has been satisfied. Press autonomy and self-indulgence are two clearly separate things.
The clause calling for the establishment of editorial committees is listed as a typical dangerous factor that would infringe on media autonomy. This isn’t entirely mistaken. The principle is that if a media company needs it, it could operate one after making a judgment on its own. Reality, however, reveals the problems in that logic. There is yet to be an clear, eye-catching index that the editorial authority of the media, a public good, is being exercised properly. There are no hopeful signs it is escaping from partisan points of view or the yoke of capital. The estrangement between the media and readers is still great. The practice is still alive of media power being wielded according to the desires of the media companies to manufacture opinion. The regulation calling for the establishment of editorial committees is judged to be a demand of the times on media that have devoted themselves to self-indulgence. We believe editorial committees are a minimum necessity for the normal development of the media.
There is also sensitivity over the management of a fund for newspaper development. There are those who worry that the fund would be managed in a biased way. It’s worth repeating here the nature of the fund. Its intention is to save the principle of diversity. When diverse opinions are freely exchanged, the level of social communication improves. A society in which specific newspapers control the market is not, in the end, a healthy society. Especially when you consider the reality in which there’s the logic of the “law of the jungle” and unfair struggle for the market, we need a social cost to protect the diversity of opinion. To worry over the creation of editorial committees and conditions placed on advertising space is employing a logic that distorts the essence of the regulations. It’s natural that since the fund would be created through taxes, it needs to be used in a justifiable and fair way. We must also watch carefully to see if those in political power attempt to use the provisions as a tool to gain control of the media.
The Hankyoreh, 13 May 2005.
[Translations by Seoul Selection (EIP)]
Press Autonomy Does Not Mean Press Self-Indulgence |
