• Korean Journal of Legislative Studies
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.113-156
• /
• 2016

Media scholars take a lion stake in power circle. Not only do they take a part in media policies but seize prestigious positions like board members in Korea Communication Commission(KCC). Unfortunately, though, little has been known about who they are, what qualifications they have, and whether they meet public interests. This paper attempts to unveil the mechanism of those politicized intellectuals who are specialized on the media. Two categories divided into 'representative' and 'expertise' are employed for this purpose. On the one hand, the representative means the degree of committment into such public services as participation in conferences or non-profit organizations. On the other hand, the number of research articles, books and projects belong to the expertise. Evaluation levels consist of 'excellence, good and average' were allocated to those scholars who are(were) in 'Power Hole,' where decision makings come into being. Some interesting observations were made though this study. First of all, such criteria as representative and expertise vaguely suggested by the laws were hardly fit into those intellectuals, Rarely did they commit into public service let alone showing vigilance in academic activities. Secondly, both ideological loyalty and political activities in line with the government had much to do with taking such positions. Thirdly, not surprisingly, it showed that to graduate from Seoul National University and have Ph.D. degree from U.S.A. was one of the most essential factors. In final, most of them were very good at taking advantage of the press in way of boosting their publicity. To attend at policy making processes either in form of board members or advisers is inevitable for media experts. However, as shown in this study, such qualification of public service and academic eagerness shouldn't be underestimated. Academic integrity not selling intelligence solely for private interests needs to be protected as well. The authors hope this study to provide a valuable opportunity to establish a kind of ethical standards in participating into politics.

• Korean Association of Arts Management
• /
• no.54
• /
• pp.5-31
• /
• 2020

This study has started from the political process of local community power structure to elaborate the reason why both a majority of cultural artists and cultural artist organizations want to be against establishing the local Foundation for Arts and Culture. The cultural artists and cultural artist organizations believe that the establishment of the local Foundation for Arts and Culture might threaten not only their monopolistic status or their livelihood in the local market relying on public supports, but also make them being marginalized from the potential supports. Therefore many of them have somewhat unfavourable opinions about its establishment. Drawing from the Jellabuk-do case, their concern of being isolated from the monopoly by the local Foundation for Arts and Culture are reduced to publicized discourses such as powerization, the lack of expertise, the loss of independence, and the fall of business. When constructing the Foundation for Arts and Culture, the major values are 'Pluralism' and 'Fairness'. On one hand, the terms of Fairness means that it should be fair in operations, support and executive composition. On the other hand, Pluralism means that policy-making rights should be distributed to various groups, not owned by some specific groups. Some plans for building Foundation for Arts and Culture are needed to make diverse classes and groups to expect the pluralistic interests emerged eventually.