BTS's full-group comeback concert, exclusively live-streamed by Netflix across more than 190 countries, has concluded successfully. The mega-event, staged at Gwanghwamun Square in the heart of Seoul, reaffirmed the global influence of Korean culture. However, it also sparked a range of policy debates — from the scope of government support for private events, to public access rights, to network usage fees for global platforms.
The concert was hosted by HYBE and sponsored by the Seoul Metropolitan Government. Beyond the use of Gwanghwamun Square, a public space, approximately 10,000 public personnel were deployed for security, traffic control, crowd management, cleaning, and safety operations. The central government and Seoul city emphasized the justification for state-level support, citing an estimated 1.2 trillion won ($880 million) in economic benefits from promoting the Korean Wave, city branding, and attracting foreign tourists. Yet controversy arose over how much public resources should be mobilized for the benefit of a specific private company.
If this concert was indeed a large-scale public cultural event aimed at spreading the Korean Wave and enhancing the city's brand — as the government and Seoul city described — then questions have been raised about whether it was appropriate that only subscribers to Netflix, a global paid over-the-top (OTT) service, could watch. The argument is that if public resources were invested, at minimum, universal viewing access should have been guaranteed for all citizens. Critics suggest that options such as simulcasting through domestic broadcasters and OTT platforms, or simultaneous distribution via terrestrial, cable, and YouTube channels, should have been considered.
The BTS concert was also a mega live-streaming event expected to draw tens of millions of simultaneous viewers worldwide. To prepare, Korea's three major telecom carriers — SK Telecom, KT, and LG Uplus — carried out preemptive network expansion, including increasing submarine cable capacity, designing traffic rerouting systems, and adding base stations. Netflix's position is that it fulfilled its obligation to ensure service stability under the Telecommunications Business Act by notifying carriers in advance of expected traffic volumes on the day. However, the actual costs of expanding network capacity and handling the surge in traffic were largely borne by the telecom companies. This has reignited the so-called "network free-riding" debate, with critics pointing out that platform companies effectively avoid paying additional infrastructure fees while enjoying massive subscriber growth and advertising revenue.
Finally, this concert marked a turning point for Netflix — which had 325 million subscribers worldwide as of January this year — as the company evolved from an online streaming service into a live broadcast platform. This signals fierce competition ahead with legacy media over advertising markets and heralds a significant shift in the media industry landscape. In this context, questions are being raised about whether existing public regulatory frameworks are sufficient, given that OTT live and channel-based services already perform functions similar to traditional broadcasting. In response, the government is pursuing a unified media law that introduces the concept of "audiovisual media services" encompassing terrestrial broadcasters, pay-TV, OTT platforms, and YouTube. The plan is to differentiate licensing and registration requirements while imposing common baseline obligations such as registration, reporting, a certain level of viewer protection, and advertising rules.
In conclusion, clear standards need to be established for public support of large-scale private events that utilize public infrastructure such as city squares and require massive deployment of public resources — as was the case with this BTS concert. Additionally, discussions are needed on criteria for selecting live-streaming platforms for such events, along with mechanisms to guarantee minimum universal viewing rights. The issues of network usage fees and regulatory equity for OTT services should also see more advanced deliberation, building on the momentum created by this controversy.