One Year After the Broadcasting Law, Why Have the Recommendation and Programming Committees Stalled?
Translated from Korean and summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.
At a glance
- A Korean broadcasting law introduced committees involving labor and management in executive appointments and programming decisions, but major broadcasters have struggled to implement them.
- Yonhap TV and YTN received three-month reductions in their broadcasting approval periods after disputes over committee structures led to violations of the law.
- Experts say the law advanced public-broadcasting independence but lacked detailed procedures and sufficient consultation among stakeholders.
More than a year after South Korea amended its three broadcasting laws, two news channels have been penalized and public broadcasters remain locked in disputes over how to apply the new rules.
Hearing Yonhap's explanation, I cannot help but ask whether it understands the contents of the Broadcasting Act.
Yonhap TV failed to establish a president recommendation committee because its largest shareholder, Yonhap News Agency, opposed the arrangement. At YTN, the largest shareholder, Eugene ENT, clashed with the labor union over demands for broader recommendation rights. Both companies ultimately received a sanction that shortened their broadcasting approval periods by three months.
The amended law requires news channels to form executive recommendation committees through labor-management consultations. The measure was intended to give unions a role in selecting presidents and curb the authority previously held by management. Yet changing company bylaws to reflect the requirement also needs approval from two-thirds of shareholders under commercial law. In practice, the system depends on major shareholders accepting a reduction in their influence.
If you keep repeating the largest shareholder's position and say you will appoint your own president, won't we continue to go in parallel lines?
The lawโs equal labor-management programming committees have faced similar resistance. KBS did not hold its programming committee for about two months from June. When it finally convened after criticism from the board, management proposed an arrangement that would sharply reduce content producersโ authority, contrary to the lawโs aim of protecting production independence through programming rules.
A law created with good intentions is not being properly followed because it was made normatively.
Other disputes have emerged over appointments to public-broadcasting boards. A Democratic Party-recommended director at the Foundation for Broadcast Culture began his term automatically after 14 days, despite controversy over whether he had held a position in Lee Jae-myungโs campaign. Other recommending organizations faced criticism for limiting candidates to their own members, withholding candidate lists, or recommending their chairperson. Experts say the law contains worthwhile protections against political and capital control, but lawmakers prioritized speed over deliberation. They argue that the gaps should now be repaired through broader consultation, using broadcastingโs public role rather than competing claims of institutional power as the standard.
The purpose of the Broadcasting Act was not to adjust the interests of forces surrounding public broadcasting, but to reflect on public broadcasting's social and public functions.
Originally published by Hankyoreh in Korean. Translated, summarized, and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.