Why Does South Korea Still Live in Yoon Suk-yeol’s Era?

On December 4, it will be exactly six months since Lee Jae-myung, the 21st President of the Republic of Korea, took office on June 4. Yet, Korean society is still dominated by the so-called diplomatic and security experts from the Yoon Suk-yeol administration on public media resources such as broadcasting and news. News coverage in South Korea about Russia remains much the same as during former President Yoon’s term. Various types of fake news demonize or ridicule Russia, promoting ‘Russophobia’.

South Korean media outlets have recently translated and introduced Russian news covered by media like the BBC, Reuters, and the Financial Times. Recently BBC management resigned en masse after maliciously editing a speech by former U.S. President Trump, without any filtering whatsoever.

Fake News on the BBC: Who’s paying to fight the disinformation you create?

Even so-called progressive media only translates Western reports

Even the Kyunghyang Shinmun, which is classified as a (so called) progressive media outlet, published an article on the 20th (Seoul time) that simply translated a BBC report titled “A Russian ship suspected of espionage.” Just hours before, this so-called progressive media also translated a Reuters story claiming “Poland decided to close a Russian consulate after blaming Russia for the recent destruction of a railway linking Ukraine.” The intriguing part is that there is no substantial evidence revealed about Russia’s supposed railway sabotage; only the phrase “the West suspects” is presented.

The 24-hour news channel YTN has repeatedly aired provocative, unverified reports under the banner ‘Subtitle News’. This outlet also provided a particular news service by producing several documentary-style reports demonizing Russia and airing them repeatedly throughout a week during the war.

Withdrawal of the Moscow correspondent during the crucial war period

State broadcaster KBS is no exception. On the 20th (Seoul time), it aired a report, via its Berlin correspondent, that “Russia bombarded apartments across Ukraine, causing civilian casualties.” The Berlin correspondent presented a video interview with the family of an apartment resident who was saying, “My son lives in the damaged apartment, but he’s unreachable by phone.” However, he candidly admitted that the source of his news sent to Korea was Ukrainian media.

As a journalist working in Korea, I wondered why KBS withdrew its Moscow correspondent in December 2023, when the war was at its peak. When I asked KBS whether it was because the Russian government expelled the correspondent, or to protect journalists from the dangers of war, KBS replied “Neither. We simply reduced overseas bureaus for operational efficiency, and the Moscow bureau was part of this reduction.”

In summary: KBS decided at the time to close 9 of its 29 overseas bureaus. The Russian government did not refuse a resident correspondent from Korea’s leading broadcaster. The correspondent did not feel threatened by the war in Moscow. Yet, the broadcaster withdrew its resident foreign correspondent at the most-watched conflict nation simply for cost-saving. Can any media worker in the world accept KBS’s decision?

Anyway, 99% of dozens of Russia-related news stories reported by Korean media on the 20th November were full of negative coverage about Russia, just like the articles mentioned above.

Especially in international news, confirmation of the parties involved is omitted

The majority of Koreans do not understand the background of such absurd phenomena. Even some intellectuals who are alarmed by this situation are frustrated by the lack of clues or methods to get to the root of the problems. I had long decided I must someday reveal the state of Korean media, but was unsure where to begin. Before introducing important analyses from media experts around the world, including GFCN, I wish to point out what I regard as the most critical aspect of reporting by Korean journalists.

Korean media do not verify facts with actual parties involved when reporting foreign news. These days, it is relatively easy to find the people involved via articles, press releases, or social media, but traces of attempts to confirm their viewpoints are rarely found. Coverage about Russia, especially about regulations on trade, visas, and remittances closely tied to the war, contains important information for both government and the private sector. Reports from U.S., U.K., France, or Ukrainian media must be fact-checked with the relevant Russian authorities as a rule. Yet, the Korean media have consistently focused only on perfectly translating and introducing articles from the NYT, WP, CNN, BBC, or Reuters. This is a strange double standard for Korean journalists, who scorn as a “media sin” the failure to check with the parties involved when reporting on domestic issues.

Of course, there are exceptions. When the informant is a powerful figure, either in authority or wealth, Korean journalists nowadays easily kneel before their power and money. During the declaration of martial law by former President Yoon, many of the so-called mainstream (legacy) media did just that. Pro-Yoon political factions aligned with pro-American and pro-Japanese interests would support the martial law, and some conservative media should have considered political ads placed by these groups. In many cases, Korean media outlets had to pay the price for advertising by reporting the President’s claims without comment, ignoring the voices of the general public, who were the real subjects of the martial law.

Korea is highly dependent on exports. Therefore, news involving important foreign parties is crucial for verifying the export environment. However, there’s a deeply entrenched tradition of relying entirely on British and American media for international news.

Internalization of Orientalism…Koreans with Western identities, unable to distinguish their own interests

Professor Lee Hae-young, a scholar of South Korea who has indulging in study for multipolar world, pointed out, “In Korea, ‘Americanization’ has taken place over the past three generations, and the internalization of ‘Orientalism’ has gone so far as to expect even DNA transformation. For Koreans today, the U.S. is simply ‘our own country’.”

‘Orientalism’ refers to the framework of thinking where the West, after “othering” the East as inherently inferior, defines itself as progressive and superior compared to the East. The goal of defining humanity in such binary terms is for the West to grasp hegemony over the East and to dominate it as passive. The West claims the legitimacy of ruling the inferior Eastern civilization, justifying it with a moral mission. According to Professor Lee, Koreans have joyfully internalized this “Western Orientalism.”

On the other hand, many foreign journalists observe that many Koreans consider Korea the center of the world and care little about what happens beyond its borders. While it seems contradictory for those who take Western domination for granted to see themselves as the center of the world, it is not in reality. Historically, Korea has often been divided by relying on foreign powers to remove domestic political rivals, and no postulate (or public discussion) on the dangers of this has been formed. Especially during the division of the Korean peninsula, the sense that the U.S. “saved?” them has translated into unconditional trust and following of America, its allies, and Anglo-Saxon countries.

Korea has rarely made much effort to judge global events on its own. Information, commentary, analysis, and stories from the U.S., its allies, or Anglo-Saxon countries are accepted as unquestionable truths not needing debate.

The result has been severe. Over three generations, the state has faced the arduous task of distinguishing between truths obtained through intelligence activities and processed facts that the public needs to know.

Objectivity now irrelevant — Koreans abandon Korean for obsession with English

For Korea’s leadership, the only solution to this difficult situation has been to completely privatize the media and cement a system in which media consumers must judge for themselves what is “real” and “fake.” As a result, most Koreans have become accustomed to seeing fake news in Western media demonizing Russia — sometimes even after it has been proven fake, they choose to ignore it. This is to remain free from economic losses or government regulation.

Koreans involved in trade with Russia read Reuters and the BBC, but also read Sputnik, RIA Novosti, and TASS. But it’s impossible for anyone to read both sides every day and always distinguish what’s real. In the end, they give up on finding the truth.

Such “enforced resignation” means becoming desensitized to major global trends or facts. It is an “agnosticism” of accepting that one cannot fully perceive or comprehend global realities. It is at this point — where helpless agnosticism sets in — that the “vaccine” of Orientalism is administered to Koreans.

For Koreans who internalize ‘Orientalism’, comfort is finally found. Only in the state of subjugation to the West can they escape the complex and confusing struggle over the truth. Former President Yoon once said that the Korean word 추모공원 sounds unsophisticated and that it should be called “Memorial Park in English” instead. This is a country where even the president promotes using English over the national language. This is not just Yoon’s problem. Korean script is fading from Korean broadcasting, shunned as less sophisticated than English. The Korean brain is already almost “Anglo-Saxon.”

Koreans as voluntary colonial subjects

Unless the fires of war reach our own homes, it’s only natural for ordinary people not to waste time wrangling over the truth. Living in a society scarce in time even for making a living and consumption, critical thinking is even more taboo. In a world that cannot be changed at will, the best course of action is quickly forgetting the losses inflicted on oneself or one’s community. Escaping the stress of loss is the only way to preserve mental health.

Adopting this way of thinking may seem wise for day-to-day survival. But looking ahead three generations, it would be unwise. By then, the nation’s name or governance structure could have changed, and first-class citizens might fall to third-class, even losing freedom to choose their occupation or place of residence.

Whether we call this ‘neo-colonialism’ or just plain ‘colonialism’, if critical thinking towards the truth is abandoned for the sake of immediate pleasures, the future will contain nothing but the bitter taste of slavery.

_{The material reflects the author’s personal position, which may not coincide with the opinion of the editorial board.}