Broadcast reform bills risk undermining national unity

 

Son Young-jun  
 
The author is a professor of media and advertising at Kookmin University.


 
In his inaugural address just six weeks ago, President Lee Jae Myung declared that “unity is a mark of competence, while division is a sign of failure.” His administration emphasized national unity as the cornerstone of governance, and the public expects to see that vision implemented through policy. However, two pending bills — one revising the Inter-Korean Relations Development Act and another comprising amendments to three broadcasting laws — seem to reflect conflicting interpretations of what that unity entails.
 
The revised Inter-Korean Relations Development Act includes a ban on the distribution of propaganda leaflets in border areas. The Yoon Suk Yeol administration had permitted such leafleting, citing freedom of expression for North Korean defector groups. But the result was increased military tension and the return of trash-filled balloons from North Korea.
 

KBS headquarters in Yeouido, western Seoul [JOONGANG PHOTO]

 
The central debate lies in whether such activities fall under constitutionally protected speech and whether they infringe on the safety and rights of others. Political philosopher John Rawls argued that even fundamental freedoms, such as speech, could be limited for the common interest. From this point of view, restricting leaflet campaigns could be justified if it safeguards public safety and reduces military tension.
 
This is not a case of arbitrarily suppressing certain viewpoints but of protecting the public, which is a shared national interest. While defector groups claim that their leafleting is a moral expression of conscience, the potential for conflict and harm to others challenges its legitimacy. Freedom of expression, like any freedom, cannot include the right to endanger others. The revised act, then, can be viewed as a necessary compromise between individual liberty and collective security, one aligned with the values of peaceful inter-Korean coexistence.
 
In contrast, the proposed revisions to the broadcasting laws — referred to as the “broadcasting reform bills” — raise concerns about their potential to deepen rather than mend divisions. The amendments call for expanding the boards of directors of public broadcasters (KBS, MBC and EBS), introducing more diverse nominating institutions, establishing a citizen-based CEO selection system and requiring approval votes for appointing news directors. They also mandate equal representation of labor and management on programming committees across public and news-only broadcasters, including private channels.
 
The most significant change is the effective transfer of presidential authority over public broadcasting leadership to broadcasting staff and union groups. Under the new rules, employees and labor unions will have a dominant say in selecting executives and influencing programming.
 

Related Article

• KCC chief booted from Cabinet meetings for 'politically biased remarks'

• Acting president issues veto against broadcasting watchdog bill

• DP says it will impeach new chair of state broadcasting watchdog

• New financial and broadcasting watchdog heads, environment minister named in Cabinet reshuffle

 
At first glance, these changes appear to bolster press freedom. However, they may undermine the balance of power demanded by Korea’s constitutional order. Public broadcasting must serve all citizens, yet these reforms risk aligning it more closely with the interests of specific internal stakeholders. Even now, public broadcasters face constant accusations of bias. Granting institutionalized control over personnel and content to employees raises the question: Who will hold them accountable?
 
The representativeness of nominating bodies such as academia, viewers' committees or legal associations also remains unclear. These institutions could easily become entangled in partisan controversies. Moreover, applying such rules to privatized networks like YTN may prompt constitutional challenges.
 
Public broadcasting should be accountable to the public alone — not to political powers, interest groups or even professional collectives. Its role is to operate independently of ideological or occupational bias and to safeguard citizens’ equal freedom. The current proposals fall short of this standard. Without broad public consensus, reforms will lack legitimacy and may further weaken the status of public broadcasting.
 
Broadcast workers have long criticized political interference, calling instead for editorial independence. But autonomy in broadcasting is a means, not an end. It should not be mistaken for the core philosophy of public service media. Editorial freedom must exist within the framework of liberal democratic values and republican governance. Otherwise, arbitrary power, even within media organizations, cannot be effectively restrained.
 

The Korea Communications Commission at the government complex in Gwacheon, Gyeonggi [YONHAP]

 
Korea maintains a public broadcasting system because of a collective belief that it ensures equal freedom for all citizens. That requires independence from political, ideological and institutional interests alike. Although current governance structures are not without problems, replacing state control with corporate autonomy may only shift the axis of bias, not eliminate it.
 
True unity is not the product of structural change alone but the result of implementing values that resonate across society. Freedom of expression must be granted equally to all. Reforming public broadcasting should begin by strengthening public consensus on the importance of that freedom. Only when citizens can freely express a diverse range of views can national unity be fully realized.
 
The proposed broadcasting reform bills do not appear to serve this goal. Instead, they reflect the interests of particular groups more than a philosophy of enhancing freedom for all.


Translated from the JoongAng Ilbo using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.