The Joongang Daily today carried an article with the headline "Controversial Media Bills Advance" and a sub-head indicating that the T.V. unions were planning a general strike over the measures to ease rules on ownership. The controversy erupted again when the chairman of the National Assembly's Culture and Broadcasting Committee introduced the media bills at a committee session yesterday despite pleas from the opposition not to do so. The action takes the disputed bill one step closer to a final vote at the Assembly's main session. The media bills were sent to the committee almost six months ago. To protest the committee chairman's action the National Union of Media Workers said it would start a general strike at 6:00 A.M. today.
Showing posts with label press. Show all posts
Showing posts with label press. Show all posts
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Media Bills Generate Controversy in National Assembly
The Joongang Daily today carried an article with the headline "Controversial Media Bills Advance" and a sub-head indicating that the T.V. unions were planning a general strike over the measures to ease rules on ownership. The controversy erupted again when the chairman of the National Assembly's Culture and Broadcasting Committee introduced the media bills at a committee session yesterday despite pleas from the opposition not to do so. The action takes the disputed bill one step closer to a final vote at the Assembly's main session. The media bills were sent to the committee almost six months ago. To protest the committee chairman's action the National Union of Media Workers said it would start a general strike at 6:00 A.M. today.
Friday, June 20, 2008
Where's the Beef? The Sources of Public Anger
One reason that the 1980s Wendy's commercial keeps popping into my mind is that I, like most observers of the political upheaval in South Korea these days, wonder what are the true or genuine sources of public anger. Few people who observe the repeated candlelight vigils and the evolution of the anti-Lee Myung Bak government movement would question that the people seem angry. Koreans are passionate about many things, including their politics. But what are the sources of this current passion? According to press reports, they include:
- Opposition to President Lee's proposal for a Grand National Canal.
- Disagreement with the new President's media reforms, including changes in relevant cabinet ministries and creation of a new Broadcasting and Communications Commission.
- Opposition to education-sector reforms instituted by the new government.
- A general opposition to the way in which President Lee's government implemented its policies, without considering the wishes of the Korean people.
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
My Interest in Korea's Information Society: II
In his classic 1950s study of American perceptions of China and India Scratches on our Minds, Harold Isaacs noted that "Vagueness about Asia has been until now the natural condition even of the educated American." His study was motivated by the apparent tendency of Americans, including policymakers, to view the world with emphasis on Europe, despite the obvious importance of Asia in America's emergence as a major world power. As I have written elsewhere, Korea illustrates the persistence of such tendencies. 
After living in Korea for two years as a young (early twenties) Peace Corps Volunteer, the lack of attention to Korea by the mainstream U.S. media became a matter of concern. When I began researching television coverage of international affairs for my doctoral dissertation at Stanford in the late 1970s it became clear that Korea's status in the American media was similar to that of many other developing nations. It appeared in the news only when there was a crisis to discuss. Other than that it was hardly covered at all. These empirical findings are all documented in my book, Television's Window on the World. Even in May of 1980, when the Kwangju uprising shook Korean politics to its core, the American television networks and other mass media devoted only a minimal amount of attention to Korea. (See my "Quiet Diplomacy in a Television Era: The Media and U.S. Policy Toward The Republic of Korea") They were preoccupied, as was the U.S. government, with the long, drawn out Iran hostage crisis. The Kwangju story never led a network television newscast. The State Department in Washington and the White House under Jimmy Carter never held a press conference. As a result, the television networks and the other major media didn't have the incentive of a press briefing in Washington D.C. to cover the Kwangju uprising. Over a decade later, in the early 1990's, I began to conduct research on the remarkable changes in Korean telecommunications during the 1980s. They constituted a truly amazing transformation, yet they did not attract the international attention they deserved until much later, after Korea itself had become an active member of both the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the International Telecommunications Union (ITU). Even in the late 1990s and the early years of this century, the media seemed to have great difficulty in reporting South Korea's world leadership in broadband internet infrastructure and usage. I attribute this lag in international recognition of South Korea's accomplishments to the general patterns of coverage that were well-established over the years in television and the mainstream press. Although South Korea is now receiving well-deserved press attention, much of that is because of North Korea's nuclear weapons development, the six-party talks and related topics. The information revolution and the new information society evolving on the Korean peninsula, although attracting attention, are hardly given their due. Nor, for that matter, is the importance of the digital divide in Korea. The Korean peninsula, which was divided as a vestige of the Cold War, is now the world's most poignant and extreme example of a digital and communications divide. Vagueness and misunderstanding of Korea persist in the United States and other parts of the world. One purpose of this blog will be to call attention to that phenomenon and to add context and clarity whenever possible.
After living in Korea for two years as a young (early twenties) Peace Corps Volunteer, the lack of attention to Korea by the mainstream U.S. media became a matter of concern. When I began researching television coverage of international affairs for my doctoral dissertation at Stanford in the late 1970s it became clear that Korea's status in the American media was similar to that of many other developing nations. It appeared in the news only when there was a crisis to discuss. Other than that it was hardly covered at all. These empirical findings are all documented in my book, Television's Window on the World. Even in May of 1980, when the Kwangju uprising shook Korean politics to its core, the American television networks and other mass media devoted only a minimal amount of attention to Korea. (See my "Quiet Diplomacy in a Television Era: The Media and U.S. Policy Toward The Republic of Korea") They were preoccupied, as was the U.S. government, with the long, drawn out Iran hostage crisis. The Kwangju story never led a network television newscast. The State Department in Washington and the White House under Jimmy Carter never held a press conference. As a result, the television networks and the other major media didn't have the incentive of a press briefing in Washington D.C. to cover the Kwangju uprising. Over a decade later, in the early 1990's, I began to conduct research on the remarkable changes in Korean telecommunications during the 1980s. They constituted a truly amazing transformation, yet they did not attract the international attention they deserved until much later, after Korea itself had become an active member of both the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the International Telecommunications Union (ITU). Even in the late 1990s and the early years of this century, the media seemed to have great difficulty in reporting South Korea's world leadership in broadband internet infrastructure and usage. I attribute this lag in international recognition of South Korea's accomplishments to the general patterns of coverage that were well-established over the years in television and the mainstream press. Although South Korea is now receiving well-deserved press attention, much of that is because of North Korea's nuclear weapons development, the six-party talks and related topics. The information revolution and the new information society evolving on the Korean peninsula, although attracting attention, are hardly given their due. Nor, for that matter, is the importance of the digital divide in Korea. The Korean peninsula, which was divided as a vestige of the Cold War, is now the world's most poignant and extreme example of a digital and communications divide. Vagueness and misunderstanding of Korea persist in the United States and other parts of the world. One purpose of this blog will be to call attention to that phenomenon and to add context and clarity whenever possible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)