Gaslighting-related broadcasts of SBS’s ‘I Want to Know That (R)’, which was scheduled to air on the 2nd, were banned by a court decision. The SBS PD Association expressed regret, saying that the judge showed a narrow view of the egg and disparaged the production team and viewers.
The broadcast that the production crew was preparing was about the suspicion of gaslighting by her husband in relation to the death of a woman. However, during the interview, her husband, who was asked for a counter-argument from the production team, applied for an injunction to ban broadcasting instead of counter-arguing, and the court accepted this.
On the 1st, the SBS PD Association issued a statement saying, “We are deeply sorry for the decision to ban the broadcast of G-R. We cannot help but be concerned about the narrow view of the judges on the media shown in the judgment,” he criticized the court decision.
The SBS PD Association said, “One of the reasons for the judge’s decision to ban broadcasting is that ‘this program has previously raised the issue of distorted and polarized broadcasting several times,’ but the judge, who should be fairer than anyone else, put this expression into the judgment. I express deep concern and regret for the writing,” he said. “Many stories that were not protected by laws and regulations were aired, and after the broadcast, new investigations were carried out, and there were many cases of unfair deaths and false accusations. It is to disparage the numerous production crews and viewers who have gone through this program.”
The SBS PD Association asked, “If someone claims that the egg is a biased and distorted broadcast, is that a ground for not being able to broadcast itself?
We also took issue with the part where the court judged that it could not have objectivity because ‘the applicants were not given sufficient opportunity to object’. The SBS PD Association said, “The request for a counter-argument was made 12 days before the scheduled broadcast, but the applicant who refused to meet filed a request for a provisional injunction instead of a counter-argument. Is there any guarantee that a decision to ban broadcasting will not be made based on this circular reasoning in the future?” he pointed out.
He also criticized the court for not permanently prohibiting the broadcast ban. The SBS PD Association said, “Even if the court judged that the content of this coverage was enough to ban the broadcast, it would seriously limit the freedom of the press because it fundamentally blocked the opportunity to re-examine the content by reinforcing additional content afterwards.” Is it really right to decide not to broadcast ‘permanently’ in an era where new facts can be reconsidered even in cases that have been ruled by the Supreme Court?”
[기사 일부 정정합니다 :
2022년 4월2일 12시25분
기자가 가처분신청을 받은 방송내용을 확인하는과정에서 일부 착오를 일으켜 기사 제목일부와 기사내용 일부, 기사 이미지를 바로잡았습니다. 독자 여러분께 사과말씀 드립니다]
※ Media Today, we value your reports.
news@mediatoday.co.kr
.png?fit=300%2C300&ssl=1){kind=spacer}
