South Korean Media Accused of Ignoring Truth, Failing to Fight Its Own Worthlessness

The South Korean media landscape is once again under scrutiny, this time for its alleged complicity in perpetuating biased narratives, particularly surrounding the Daejang-dong development scandal and investigations linked to former Prosecutor General Yoon Suk-yeol. This commentary, published in the Hankyoreh, argues that a significant portion of the press has failed in its fundamental duty to report truthfully and hold power accountable.

The article points to a specific Dong-A Ilbo report from October 9, 2021, concerning the Daejang-dong scandal, as a prime example of journalistic malpractice. It claims this report, which alleged that a portion of profits from the scandal belonged to 'that person,' was based on hearsay, lacked concrete evidence, and was later contradicted by testimony from the former head of the first Daejang-dong investigation team. Despite this, the article contends, the report was not corrected, and other media outlets amplified the narrative, effectively framing Lee Jae-myung as the individual in question.

Furthermore, the commentary asserts that many media organizations have systematically ignored or downplayed testimonies and evidence that challenge the prosecution's case. This includes the testimony of former prosecutor Kim Tae-hoon, who reportedly stated that a key statement in the 'Jeong Young-hak recording' was fabricated, and the alleged manipulation of call recordings and text messages by journalists. The article contrasts this with the media's eagerness to report on claims made by prosecutors or individuals aligned with them, suggesting a clear bias in favor of the prosecution's agenda.

The author draws a stark parallel between the current alleged practices of the prosecution and the human rights abuses and evidence manipulation seen during South Korea's authoritarian past. The piece questions the very existence and purpose of media outlets that appear to prioritize political alignment over truth and human rights, suggesting that they have become subservient to powerful institutions rather than acting as their watchdogs. The article concludes with a pointed question: can the media truly claim to be fighting for their own value when they remain silent in the face of such alleged transgressions?