The Hankyoreh “shocking” on Kim Gun-hee’s broadcast, The Chosun Ilbo “smells of political manipulation”

On the 16th, MBC’s investigative news program ‘Straight’ revealed part of the conversation between Yoon Seok-yeol, the spouse of presidential candidate Kim Geon-hee and Seoul Voice Reporter Lee Myung-soo, 52 times from July to December last year.

The content of this broadcast attracted more attention because the people’s power went through a commotion, such as filing an application for an injunction to ban broadcasting, making a protest visit to MBC, and then broadcasting after a court decision.

However, after the broadcast on the 16th, the reaction was divided in two. One reaction is that it is shocking to hear that Kim Gun-hee tells reporters, ‘Come to camp,’ and ‘Do what I tell you,’ or ‘MeToo doesn’t work because the conservatives take care of the money’ related to the #MeToo incident.

On the other hand, there are also reactions such as ‘Is this content really in the public domain’ and ‘I wonder if it should have caused a loud controversy’. In addition, the Chosun Ilbo and JoongAng Ilbo are approaching the call in a way that points out the ethical issue of reporting, saying that the call is centered on private content. The Chosun Ilbo even wrote that it was a political operation.

▲ A collection of front pages of major daily newspapers on the 17th.

The following is the title of an article dealing with the conversation between Kim Kun-hee and reporter Sori of Seoul on the front page of major national daily newspapers issued on the morning of the 17th.
No report on the front page of the Kyunghyang Shinmun
The Kookmin Ilbo “Kim Geon-hee’s ‘Me Too, explodes because you don’t pay’ is a more cloudy presidential edition”
Dong-A Ilbo “Kim Geon-hee’s ‘Me Too explodes because you don’t take care of money’ Asking media staff for help, ‘I can give you 100 million'”
Seoul Newspaper “Me too explodes because you don’t take money, the Democratic Party who raised the investigation, the enemy of the country”
Segye Ilbo “Working as an advisor to a shaman who is close to a married couple”
There is no such report on the front page of the Chosun Ilbo
No corresponding report on the front page of JoongAng Ilbo
Hankyoreh “Kim Kun-hee, ‘Come to camp, you should do what I tell you’”
The Hankook Ilbo “Call 52 with Kim Gun-hee, YouTube reporter ‘Come to camp, maybe I can give you 100 million won'”

Most major comprehensive daily newspapers placed this on the front page, but the Kyunghyang Shinmun, Chosun Ilbo, and JoongAng Ilbo did not place this article on the front page. The Chosun Ilbo and JoongAng Ilbo dealt with this issue as editorials and pointed out the ethical issues of reporting.

Pointed out as a problem in the #MeToo-related remarks and conciliation of reporters in the conversation

Among the numerous calls, the Kookmin Ilbo, Donga Ilbo, and Seoul Shimbun selected Kim Kun-hee as the headline on the front page to say, “Me Too explodes because you don’t pay for it” in relation to ‘Me Too’.

The Hankyoreh and Hankook Ilbo told reporters from Seoul’s Voice, Kim Kun-hee, “Come to camp and do what I tell you. If you do well, I can give you 100 million.”

▲ Front page of the Kookmin Ilbo on the 17th.
▲ Front page of the Kookmin Ilbo on the 17th.
▲The Hankyoreh page 1 on the 17th.
▲The Hankyoreh page 1 on the 17th.

On the other hand, the Segye Ilbo placed on the front page an article, not a report by MBC, that a shaman Mr. Jeon, a shaman, was working at the Election Countermeasures Headquarters by Yoon Seok-yeol as an advisor.

The JoongAng Ilbo did not place the report on the front page, but only placed an introductory article titled ‘Disclosure of Kim Gun-hee’s call recording, spread of controversy over reporting ethics violations’. The article is on page 6. On page 6, “Kim Gun-hee’s recording is released, the ruling party is silent, the opposition party ‘no problem'” deals with the MBC report, and the recording is in the article “‘Speech of a brother-in-law’ and ‘7-hour call’ voice files can be released when there is a public interest” I wrote that the file was “a recording of a private conversation.”

The JoongAng Ilbo said, “Article 251 of the Public Official Election Act punishes candidates or their family members who slander candidates or their families by stating facts for the purpose of winning or losing. At this time, the Supreme Court believes that ‘slander’ is demeaning or slandering others without justifiable reasons. If the content is consistent with the truth as a whole, and the motive for reporting for the public interest is recognized, it will be excluded from punishment. If the public interest and private interest are pursued at the same time, the Supreme Court has recognized the purpose of public interest, even if the public interest is greater than the private interest. It is to recognize the wider scope of public interest than defamation under the criminal law.”

▲ On the 17th, the JoongAng Ilbo, page 6.
▲ On the 17th, the JoongAng Ilbo, page 6.

If you look at the content of the article on page 6, it is said that there is no problem in that the disclosure of the recording file, even if it is a private call, is not subject to punishment if it is announced for the public interest. It’s a bit inconsistent.

Central and Chosun editorials on the issue of violating reporting ethics

The issue was also covered as an editorial in 5 of the 9 major comprehensive newspapers.
Seoul Shimbun “Report on the transcript of Kim Kun-hee, who was noisy like an empty cart”
The Chosun Ilbo “A strange presidential election where the essence disappears and gossip workshops run”
JoongAng Ilbo “Kim Gun-hee transcript showdown, how ugly will it get?”
Hankyoreh “Inappropriate involvement in election campaign revealed by Kim Kun-hee’s upbringing”
Hankook Ilbo “Kim Gun-hee’s phone broadcast, voters must decide”

▲ 17th JoongAng Ilbo editorial.
▲ 17th JoongAng Ilbo editorial.

The JoongAng Ilbo and Chosun Ilbo pointed out through editorials, etc. that disclosing the recording file could violate the ethics of reporting.

The JoongAng Ilbo also showed a desire to emphasize the violation of reporting ethics in the editorial “How far will the ‘Kim Gun-hee Transcript’ confrontation get ugly?” The editorial said, “Just because this reporter revealed his identity as a ‘reporter’ to Kim at the beginning does not guarantee the justification of the recording. It is difficult to say that Kim consented to the recording by watching only the broadcast. In addition, there are many passages where this reporter acted as a de facto informant or political adviser, leading to Mr. Kim’s answer. I cannot help but be criticized for being against the ethics of reporting.”

▲ 17th Chosun Ilbo editorial.
▲ 17th Chosun Ilbo editorial.

The Chosun Ilbo also covered the issue on page 5 instead of page 1, and one of the three articles was an article that conveyed the contents of the MBC report, and the article “I threw rice cakes at Kim Geon-hee while pretending to be with my mother” was subtitled “Who Recorded How?” After this reporter called Kim Kun-hee for the first time on July 6 last year, wearing a ‘,’ wrote the process of calling each other ‘sister’ and ‘brother’ within a month.

The Chosun Ilbo pointed out the ethics of reporting as in the editorial of the JoongAng Ilbo in the editorial “A strange presidential election where the essence disappears and gossip studios run rampant”. The Chosun Ilbo said, “There is a smell of political manipulation in the process of recording and reporting Mr. Kim’s remarks. Lee approached him as if he was giving out political advice, and then recorded all of his private conversations. When doing coverage or reporting, you should inform the other party of the purpose, but you also ignored basic media ethics.”

The Hankyoreh editorial criticizes the issue of convincing reporters and remarks related to #MeToo

These editorials of the JoongAng Ilbo and Chosun Ilbo are in contrast to the editorials of the Hankyoreh. The Hankyoreh, in the editorial “Inappropriate ‘Participation in the Election Campaign,’ Revealed by Kim Geon-hee’s Upbringing,” was “shocking” for the fact that Mr. ” he wrote.

▲ The Hankyoreh editorial on the 17th.
▲ The Hankyoreh editorial on the 17th.

The Hankyoreh said, “It is a very inappropriate act that one should not do as the spouse of a presidential candidate. Kim should start with a clear explanation of his actions to convince reporters covering him with his position as a bait. What he said should be clearly covered up,” he pointed out. He also criticized the comment regarding the #MeToo movement, saying, “It cannot but be a statement that reveals a distorted perception of sexual crimes and women’s human rights.”

The Hankook Ilbo showed a unique neutral tone in the editorial “Kim Gun-hee’s phone broadcast, voters must decide”.

The Hankook Ilbo said, “The voters will decide whether Kim’s public remarks are really serious flaws or a suspicion close to a political offensive. Both the political world and the media should work hard to ensure that the election is again fruitful,” he wrote.

▲ The Hankook Ilbo editorial on the 17th.
▲ The Hankook Ilbo editorial on the 17th.
▲ An editorial from the Seoul newspaper on the 17th.
▲ An editorial from the Seoul newspaper on the 17th.

In an editorial, the Seoul Shimbun said, “There are even criticisms of MBC’s reporting ethics, whether it was necessary to report on such a private conversation of the spouse of an opposition presidential candidate during prime time on a weekend evening.” At a sensitive time with only 50 days left, it is inevitable that the dispute over whether the recording and broadcasting itself contained political intentions from the beginning is continuing in terms of freedom of the press and the responsibility of fair reporting.”

He further pointed out, “Irrespective of the pros and cons of the ruling and opposition parties, it is a matter of examining whether the disclosure of these private conversations is in line with the people’s right to know.”




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.