The framework of media governance
is a useful tool to use to uncover the dynamics of the media ecosystem, which is not limited to media regulations and policies, but provides an integrated view of media systems. Governance
provides a framework for identifying the network of actors, the blurred boundary between the private and the public sector, and the relationship between different socio-political dimensions. In particular, through interactions among stakeholders, we can see the system moving and changing. I have examined media changes in Korea from 1980 to 2017 through interaction among four factors, including the three stakeholders of government, industry, and civil society, as well as a global factor.
I deal with media governance in Korea since 1980, because, since that time, Korean society has undergone dramatic changes, making this a very important period in history. Changes in Korean society can be addressed using three keywords: industrialization, democratization
, and informatization.
Korea began a new era in 1980, which ended the 18-year reign of President Park. However, under the transitory military power, the media sector encountered dramatic events such as coercive media reshuffling and the enactment of the notorious media laws. During the same period the conservative right-wing government of South Korea, led by the military, followed the global trend towards neoliberalism and conservatism. Media controls, including a media reshuffle, report guidelines, and the Framework Act on Media,
were implemented by the authoritarian government. However, the media industry nevertheless enjoyed stable growth and increasing revenues through the oligopoly system.
In Korean history, the year 1987 was a turning point, as Korea transformed from a military-led regime into a democratic country. Capitalism, democratization
, and globalization
were becoming more influential not only in the world, but also in Korea. The Korean government reorganized its media policy to introduce autonomy and competition in the media, rather than the direct controls utilized by the previous regime. Since then, the media industry has grown in line with economic development. At the same time, citizen media emerged, labour unions were established in the media industry, and civil society began its engagement in the media reform.
In the 1990s, the media sector became more interested in increasing market value rather than public interest value. The world’s media industry drastically changed as it embraced new electronic developments. Meanwhile, the Korean government adopted a market-oriented policy. As a result, commercial media companies expanded, which led to a fiercely competitive environment. In order to nurture the independent production industry, a mandated independent production quota was put in place. The overseas export of TV programmes created the new cultural phenomenon of the ‘Korean Wave
’, and the government utilized broadcasting policy committees as a new policy-making process, which increased participation from diverse professionals and interest groups. Meanwhile, civil society expressed strong opposition to the industrialization of the media and gradually expanded its scope, influencing policy decisions.
Since the 1990s, the world has come to realize that the different forms of media were bound to converge and has thus established corresponding systems as a result. The Korean government also responded to this global trend. It established the information and communication sector as the nation’s key strategic area through a series of national information society plans, beginning with the Informatization Promotion Basic Law
in 1995 in order to promote the nation’s information society, establish the infrastructure of the information communication industry, and promote high-speed information communication business. Cable TV
was launched by the national plan, although market and public value collided in its implementation. Conflicts among ministries distracted pursuit of the new media. Nevertheless, the launch of cable TV greatly increased the number of Korean media companies. Various small and medium-sized enterprises entered the media industry for the first time, diversifying and enriching it. However, civil society regarded cable TV as a representative example of a ‘national project failure’. It demanded countermeasures to protect public interest.
Since the new millennium, the electronic communication media environment has significantly changed. New regulatory reforms were introduced globally. Following the US Telecommunication Act of 1996, the European Union (EU) adopted the recommendation to apply a single regulatory framework to all electronic communications network
s and electronic communications service
s. The UK 2003 Communication Act was another turning point in media history. Whatever services were provided, the concept of a bundled electronic communication network was used without distinguishing between different forms of media and communication. In line with the global trend, the Korean government enacted the Broadcasting Act
in 2000 and Newspaper Act in 2005
to integrate separate laws and to promote the development of the media industry and media convergence. Internet media emerged as an alternative form of media, supported by the progressive government, and its influence spread. The media industry became more diversified through deregulation of media ownership and operation. At the same time, the progressive government enhanced public interest in the media and improved the interests and welfare of citizens. In order to support local media, which was facing economic problems, the government introduced a public funding system. As the involvement of civil society in the media increased and the Internet spread, civil society, including labour unions and media professional organizations, became more involved in the media policy decision-making process. In particular, media access and media literacy were institutionalized. In the media sector, the previous state-centred policy was transformed into multi-stakeholder-centred policy.
Digitization of the media accelerated media convergence
, with the transformation to digital media and convergence of mobiles and the Internet being actively developed around the world. The USA and the European Union developed differing digital broadcasting standards and competed globally. Digital broadcasting led even the electronics industry to participate in media governance. This change was particularly unique in deciding the digital broadcasting standard in Korea as it was the home of the world-leading TV display manufacturers Samsung Electronics and LG Electronics. The Korean government viewed the promotion of digital TV
as an important national project, pursued policies on multimedia and multi-channel services, and began to allow telecommunication carriers to offer broadcast services. The world’s first mobile TV
was introduced by SK Telecom. Internet protocol television (IPTV)
was licensed to three major telecommunication carriers. Telecommunication companies entered the media industry and actively promoted media convergence, thus resulting in more competition among media service providers. Cable TV, satellite TV, and IPTV competed for the same subscribers. In the digital TV transition process, civil society was heavily involved and played a significant role. While it was concerned about the competitive media environment, civil society’s goal was to not lose the public service function of media while recognizing that media convergence was inevitable.
In the 2000s, the convergence of newspapers, broadcasting, telecommunication, and the Internet led to active discussion concerning the regulatory framework of media convergence and the restructuring of a global regulatory body. In Korea, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the UK Office of Communications (Ofcom) were the preferred models, because these two organizations were believed to guarantee media independence. For a single convergent organization, the commission model was preferred to the ministry model as it was more difficult for the government to directly intervene in it. After a nearly decade of debate, in 2008 the Korea Communications Commission
(KCC) was created as a new regulatory body for media convergence. Within the KCC was integrated the Ministry of Information and Communication and the KBC. The KCC was requested to relax strict regulations on the broadcasting and telecommunications sectors in order to strengthen competitiveness and to revitalize convergence services. However, this policy orientation was not hailed with delight among media professionals and civil society. Civil society was critical at the beginning, but, later, actively engaged in the KCC in order to secure media independence.
As media convergence proceeded, cross-media ownership regulation was eased globally. Mergers and acquisitions in the industry increased; as a result, media conglomerates’ global market share expanded. The conservative Korean government realized the importance of revitalizing the media industry by easing media ownership and regulation. It emphasized the need for new investment in the contents industry, the engine for future growth, and the fostering of the global media group. After intense debate, the government amended the media laws to allow newspaper and broadcasting firms to grow into a media conglomerate. The progressive opposition party and civil society opposed against this trend, concerned about the possible monopoly of public opinion. However, to ensure diversity in public opinion, the government established a media diversity
committee as well as regulatory measures. It adopted the audience-share regulation
system, and, in order to prevent the invasion of a monopoly public opinion by the domination of newspaper and broadcasting, restricted the audience share of each company to 30%. The media market expanded as a result of the easing of media cross-ownership regulations. In particular, newspaper companies were able to provide general programming channels
, which is the Korean version of terrestrial channels. They had the opportunity to grow into a media conglomerate. The progressive opposition party strongly opposed general programming channels provided by newspaper companies, even deciding not to appear on such channels. However, those channels ironically played significant roles in toppling the conservative administration. They did not submit to the political power who created them, thus showing that media independence was in place in Korea.
Entering the 2000s, there was an increasing demand for expanding from media governance
to ICT governance
, as the media was not seen as media alone but rather as part of the framework of ICT. In Europe, a horizontal regulatory system based on a layered regulatory model was institutionalized. Academics and media professionals saw the introduction of the horizontal governance model as an advanced regulatory model. However, Korea’s civil society and the traditional media sector had concerns about a loss of public interest value if the media were to be totally integrated into ICT governance. It was difficult to reach a consensus on a ICT governance model. Instead, in 2013, the Korean government sought to promote change in the ICT governance system by the reorganization of a dual ministry: the Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning
and the Kore Communications Commission. The dual ministry setting was the result of balancing public interest protection and industry growth.
In addition, as the Internet influenced media as well as society as a whole, the multi-stakeholder model of internet governance has been used in the media sector. Coincidentally, in Korea’s media governance, private sector and civil society played significant roles, as did the government.
This result has been gradually reached over the last 37 years, dating back from 1980. The process has not been easy. At every stage, there have been fierce debates among the related stakeholders, and it has taken nearly a decade to implement a particular policy or plan. The new administration sometimes overthrew the previous administration’s decisions. The key point was how to balance public interest protection and industry growth. However, the process of going back and forth was not just a waste of time. Through that process, Korea’s media governance framework has become solid and enriched.
On the one hand, media regulation has been eased, media independence expanded, and governmental intervention reduced. In such an environment the media industry has developed strongly, and led to economies of scale. On the other hand, public opinion diversity has been protected by the media diversity index and audience-share regulation. Local media in economic difficulties have been given public funding support. Civil society participation in the media policy-making process and operation has grown.
The media in Korea has been greatly expanding since the 1980s. The size of the media industry has increased, as well as the number of operators and participants in the sector. Traditional media is shifting to the Internet and mobile-oriented media. During this process, public interest and the market principle led to the media ecosystem maturing and developing in an upward form by going back and forth. Media governance has broadened, with entities such as industry and civil society interacting with the government. In addition, a rotation of conservative and progressive administrations has contributed to overcoming conflicts among the stakeholders and enriching the width and depth of media governance. Korea’s media governance model could be a unique case that shows how industrialization, democratization
, and informatization, under the influence of globalization
, have seen the development of the nation’s media ecosystem.