An amendment to the Network Act, which imposes punitive damages on media outlets and YouTubers who intentionally circulate false or manipulated information, takes effect starting the 7th. Despite significant controversy over its constitutionality as an "infringement of freedom of expression" and strong opposition from civic groups, the bill—passed unilaterally by the Democratic Party of Korea through the National Assembly late last year—is now going into force after about six months.
The amendment allows punitive damages of up to five times the amount of damages to be claimed not only against those who intentionally create illegal or false and manipulated information, but also against media companies, platform operators, and YouTubers who circulate it. For this reason, it has been criticized as an "online gag law." The requirement imposed on platform operators to delete false information has drawn criticism as an "introduction of censorship."
The government argues that this is not "prior censorship," since the determination of false or manipulated information is left to private self-regulation. But given that the Broadcasting, Media and Communications Commission holds the authority to investigate the overall operations of operators, platforms will have no choice but to delete content at even the slightest hint of a problem. Criticism is inevitable that free public discourse could be undermined, in that the system is self-regulatory only on the surface while in practice it forces platforms to preemptively delete and block content. The ambiguity of the "hatred, animosity, and incitement" provisions included in the scope of review for false and manipulated information is also a problem. Because it is unclear what constitutes incitement and which expressions amount to animosity and hatred, excessive regulation could be rampant. The amendment specifies as subject to application YouTubers with 100,000 or more subscribers or more than 100,000 monthly average views, but there is no clear basis for these numerical standards, drawing criticism that they are arbitrary figures assembled for administrative convenience.
Amid the advance of artificial intelligence (AI) and rapid changes in the media environment, the harms of fake news and information that incites hatred and animosity are growing more serious by the day. However, if criticism of government policy is also controlled by labeling it as fake news, this could lead to a distortion of democracy and the erosion of the constitutional value of freedom of expression. Criticism of power is also a safeguard that prevents the failure of power. If even public-interest questions raised in the course of the press performing its inherent function are stifled under the frame of fake news, those in power may fall into error and arrogance, inviting crisis upon themselves. The government and the National Assembly must, even now, prepare supplementary measures that clarify the scope of regulation and block the possibility of abuse.
