Broadcasting Scholars Propose Re-evaluation of Deliberation System Amid Media Shifts

Concerns have been raised that the existing broadcast news deliberation system is failing to function effectively amidst a rapidly changing media environment. The emergence of global OTT services like Netflix and various online platforms has fundamentally altered how people consume news. Consequently, experts argue that the current regulatory framework needs to be reshaped to accommodate the evolved market.

At a Korea Broadcasting Scholars Association seminar held on the 18th at National Pukyong University in Busan, Professor Hong Seong-cheol of Kyonggi University's Department of Media and Visual Arts noted that the abstractness of the concept of 'fairness' has repeatedly led to controversies in its application. He stated that systemic improvements are necessary to prevent deliberations on political and contentious matters from stifling reporting. Professor Hong highlighted that out of 30 statutory sanctions issued by the Election Broadcasting Deliberation Committee in 2024, 26 were for fairness violations. He analyzed that the structure, where deliberation outcomes affect broadcasters' license renewals, can lead stations to lower their voices or refrain from reporting on potentially controversial issues.

Seminar attendees stressed the need to re-evaluate the broadcasting deliberation system in light of media environment changes. However, opinions were also voiced calling for a cautious approach to proposed amendments to the Broadcasting Act, particularly those aiming to delete fairness clauses. There were concerns that replacing fairness provisions with other abstract concepts might not fundamentally alter the nature of the regulation.

Questions were also raised about the appropriateness of maintaining strict regulations on specific media outlets while their influence is shifting. Professor Park Seong-bok of Hanyang University's Department of Media pointed to an asymmetrical regulatory structure where terrestrial and general programming channels face tight scrutiny, while platforms like YouTube and OTT services are subject to little regulation. He proposed that measures to impose certain responsibilities and oversight on online platforms, including YouTube, should be considered concurrently.