|
The press should know no sanctuary, they say. It shouldn¡¯t if it is to perform the roles of checks and criticism. Yet it does, though perhaps they should be called taboos rather than sanctuaries, not in the sense that they are too sacred for the press to criticize but that nothing is to be gained if they are. The Korean press has three taboos: region, women and religion. Nobody has defined them for us; the conclusion has been reached through long experience. It is perhaps because region, women and religion concern something innate and metaphysical.
The press had big trouble with regional issues. On issues of regional discrimination, everyone pretends to be resolute, but they are so sensitive that nobody can get around them. But there are minor issues that do not go to the heart of essential regional sentiment. An example is the description of the people of a certain province as hard headed ¡°potatoes.¡± Unintentional use of the common phrase invited a newspaper boycott drive for this newspaper on the grounds that we disparaged the province. There is thus a widespread feeling among journalists that even if they try to give fair and balanced coverage to a certain region, the response of the locals will be lukewarm at best.
Women¡¯s issues must be handled with care as well. Handling women¡¯s issues from the perspective of inequality or playing up women¡¯s social progress is of course welcome. But any articles critical of women or giving the impression of disparaging them result in big trouble. For reasons of self-preservation, the press is therefore reluctant to touch negative issues to do with women.
And the top taboo is religion. It is here that the media are under the greatest physical threat. Some press organs that have reported on corruption in some fringe sect have suffered occupations of the editorial bureau: there can be few newspapers or broadcasters who haven¡¯t experienced this once or twice. As a consequence, a sort of rule seems to have emerged among journalists that nothing can be gained by touching any religion.
The taboos spill over into politics. One of the reasons why the Lee Myung-bak administration has been in trouble from the outset may well be its failure to appreciate this. Ko-So-Young, a word referring to Lee's alma mater Korea University, his Somang Presbyterian Church, and his home region of Youngnam or the Gyeongsang provinces, is richly suggestive of this. The fact that Lee is a devout Christian, that he hails from the Youngnam region, and that he attempted to abolish the Ministry of Gender and Equality early in office mean that he courted confrontation in all three taboo areas, and that seems to be why he has difficulties in resolving those problems.
Many expect that Lee will recognize those problems and endeavor to resolve them. They equally hope that Buddhist leaders will dispel concerns that they are playing power games. Buddhism, with its history of thousands of years, has no reason to feel threatened by a man in power; Lee will not be so foolish as to be ignorant of this. Hopefully he will explain that to Buddhist leaders and not remain shackled by the taboo.
The range of groups demanding influential positions and obsessed with their exclusive interests is growing in our society. It is not just newspapers any more: even soap operas and other mass media products don¡¯t dare to touch the dark sides and corruption of particular groups. Such groups often resort to physical violence on grounds that their image has been hurt -- ironically they tend to focus on reports that publicize them affirmatively and play up their good aspects.
We do not need more taboos. Taboos are inevitably set up to favor people in power, with a lot of money and large organizations. The meaning of democracy often lies in dragging political power out of the sanctuary and emancipating it from taboos. Genuine democracy lies in smashing the sanctuaries not only of the politically powerful but also of semi-powers such as big business, the press, civic organizations and religions.
|
