Stalemate Over the Passage of the 'Media Arbitration Act Amendment'

Opposition Party Opposes 'Jae-gal Mul-gi'... Ruling Party Temporarily Cancels Bill Subcommittee Meeting

Photo by Getty Images Bank

[Asia Economy Reporters Oh Ju-yeon, Geum Bo-ryeong] The Democratic Party of Korea has begun processing the so-called 'Media Arbitration Act Amendment' that includes punitive damages up to five times the amount of damage caused by 'fake news.' Facing criticism as 'gagging' and opposition from conservative opposition parties, the Democratic Party has temporarily retreated by canceling the bill subcommittee meeting.

On the 16th, the Democratic Party planned to hold a meeting of the National Assembly's Culture, Sports and Tourism Committee's bill review subcommittee to discuss the processing of the Media Arbitration Act amendment. However, three members from the People Power Party expressed their intention to abstain, calling it a unilateral meeting.

Lee Dal-gon, the opposition party's secretary, told Asia Economy in a phone interview, "The People Power Party will not attend in full," adding, "I don't think the ruling party will push the bill through forcibly, but if they do, the opposition will not be insignificant." The Democratic Party notified the opposition of the subcommittee meeting the night before, but the People Power Party said it was physically difficult to attend the subcommittee. This is because two of the three members are in self-quarantine due to COVID-19.

The Media Arbitration Act amendment consists of three bills separately proposed by Representatives Kim Yong-min, Park Jung, and Yoon Young-chan. The main content of these bills includes punitive damages for false reports up to five times the amount of damages, and if it is difficult to calculate a specific amount, damages between 50 million and 100 million KRW are to be determined considering the circumstances leading to the report and the extent of damage. Additionally, all corrections must be forced to be published as the lead article on the same day, and the burden of proof for the absence of intentional responsibility lies with the media company. The ruling party emphasizes the prompt passage of the bill to minimize damage caused by 'fake news,' but the opposition argues that the side effects of media control are significant and opposes the bill.