• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.79
• /
• pp.104-139
• /
• 2016

This study investigated how Korean media covered Japan's position on her past history issues proposed by Abe' Shinzo's cabinet. The researchers adopted Entman's analytical tools for frame analysis and the concept of "frame changing" proposed by Chi and McCombs. The analysis rendered several propositions. First of all, the Korean media's coverage on Japan's past history issues focused heavily on the current conflict among two nations rather than constructing a futuristic viewpoint based on a thorough discussion on the historical background of the topic. In addition, it emphasized that the conflict should be resolved by political negotiations between the two governments. Secondly, the news coverages depicted "comfort women" issues as the prime element of the conflict, describing Abe's cabinet as the major inducer of the conflict. Ideological and political divisions among Korean media did not significantly influence on how they frame Japan's past history issues. In general, Korean media took the stance of ethnocentric "patriotic journalism," advocating Korean government's position and covering the emotional reactions from Korean public instead of providing through and through objective news coverage on Japan's past history issues.

• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.81
• /
• pp.189-224
• /
• 2017

The case of 'Paik Jong-moon's Taped Conversation,' has presented "an important and serious challenge to the freedom of the press and democracy" in South Korea. Nevertheless, this case has not been reported by the mainstream news media. It has also been forgotten without a proper fact-finding or investigation by regulatory agencies, like The Foundation for Broadcast Culture, The Korea Communications Commission, or The National Assembly. This study aims to examine why the above has happened through in-depth interviews of reporters and TV producers, senior journalists, former and incumbent commissioners of the broadcasting regulatory agencies, and experts of the industry, as well as literature research. Here, I present three answers. First, I found two reasons the mainstream press has ignored this incident. 1) It serves for political interests instead of reporting truth. 2) Public broadcasters' watchdog role has been neutralized. Second, regulatory agencies like The Foundation for Broadcast Culture, The Korea Communications Commission and The National Assembly are ruled by political tribalism. The ruling party's members of the National Assembly and these agencies were reluctant to investigate allegations surrounding Paik Jong-moon, such as illegal dismissals, illegal intervention in programming or production, illegal recruitment and illegal business deals. That's because they considered CEO Paik an ally. Using their majority power, they have rejected the request from opposition-affiliated commissioners or from opposition lawmakers to investigate the allegations. Third, there were no alternative forces within the public broadcasters to unveil the truth. In conclusion, the legal and institutional shake-up of corporate governance is urgently needed for public broadcasters and broadcasting regulatory agencies.