Freedom of Speech in South Korea
- torialinacooper
- Sep 29, 2018
- 3 min read
Updated: Oct 7, 2018
Under the authoritarian rule of strongman leaders such as Rhee Syngman, Park Chunghee, and Chun Doohwan, the media in South Korea was tightly regulated by the government. Changes to the freedom of speech and press have been largely decided in the political context with leaders such as Roh Taewoo introducing a liberalization of the media (Kwak 2012 3). Limits to this new freedom, however, can be seen in the National Security Law which limits the spread of ideas that are considered Pro-North Korea or communist. With South Korea's history of tight government control over the spread of information, it is no surprise that the laws dealing with the freedom of speech of citizens and the media are much stricter than freedom of speech laws in Western countries.

For example, the defamation laws in South Korea still reflect the history of the repression of freedom of speech. In Chief Kim, TQ sues Ms. Lee for “spreading rumors, work interference, and defamation.” Under South Korean defamation law, the burden of proof is on the accused to prove they did not defame the accuser. The restriction on Ms. Lee’s freedom of speech is a direct result of South Korea’s history of media and speech restriction. Although the defamation charges against Ms. Lee was dropped, the lawsuit represented limitations that continue to constrict what South Koreans can and cannot say.

The impact of social networking sites (SNS) on South Korean culture cannot be understated as technology becomes one of the biggest exports out of South Korea. While censorship on other mediums, such as television and radio, have a long history in South Korea, the creation of the internet and social media is fairly new and unregulated. The “Hallyu Wave” is increasingly contributing to the GDP of South Korea and the internet and social media are essential to its growing impact. In a very short amount of time, the South Korean government has shifted from repressing the freedom of information to actively investing in SNS to support the industries that further the reach of the Hallyu Wave all over the world (Kwon 2013 523). Although, investment in Korean cultural activities is not a new idea as the administration under Chun Doohwan famously supported the 3-S Policy, the influence of the internet and SNS on the spread of information is unprecedented.

In Chief Kim, this is referenced when the Chinese Investors request Chief Kim to be on the auditing team for TQ Curriers after seeing his viral video on SNS. Not only does Chief Kim get the position on the auditing team, but he wins Employee of the month. Chief Kim’s viral video reflects the growing use of SNS in South Korea and how it’s effects are permeating into their everyday lives. The impact of SNS and the spread of information via the internet is remarkable for a country that only recently digressed from its long history of media censorship.
Questions:
1. Do you believe having some restraints on freedom of speech protect a society from misinformation/defamation or suppresses a fundamental human right?
2. How does the collectivism of Korean society impact the freedom of speech, spread of information, and SNS use?
Citations:
Kim, Joseph and Seung-Ho Kwon. “From Censorship to Active Support: The Korean State and Korea’s Cultural Industries.” The Economic and Labour Relations Review 24, no.4 (2013): 517-534.
Kwak, Ki-Sung. Media and Democratic Transition in South Korea. London: Routledge, 2012.
(All images/screenshots were taken from Viki and no copyright or infringement intended)
Hey everyone,
Some really awesome comments happening here, and it seemed like it was going to get heated at times! Great questions and integration of concepts, Tori.
I find the dichotomy between Edward and Teodora’s thoughts really interesting, because if you take the two examples used (the U.S. and Korea) and place them on a spectrum, you can see that abuses of power happen in both arenas - especially if you are following current events recently. Sometimes, even if something is said, nothing will be done, and that gives people an even greater sense of crushing injustice. But if nothing is said, at least people have the illusion that things are running smoothly, until the reality comes crashing through the…
I'm sorry I wasn't sure how I could edit it but I figured it out.
Why weren't mistakes on this page corrected?
I agree to what Teodora and Will said. Nowadays, it is normal for people to assume that everybody has freedom of speech and the right of speech as compare to 50 years ago. However, to me, it seems like Chief Kim is based on what’s actually happening in Korea. On the surface level, everybody seems to have freedom of speech and Korea is a country that gives you freedom to participate in social media or any form of media etc. But deep down, the media is controlled by people who have power and money, to be specific, the group of people who contribute large percentage of GDP in Korea. They have the power to express whatever information they want public…
This is looking great^^ -- one small correction, in your in-text citations please include the year (Smith 2019, 22). Also I think you mean the burden of proof ... did NOT defame. They aren't asked to prove they did it, they are asked to prove they didn't.