“Our publication will not be a mouthpiece for any political party, government or President,” stated Le Figaro’s Journalists’ Society in an open letter to their editor this month. This was a surprisingly bold move in one of France’s leading rightist newspapers; it has been a steadfast supporter of President Nicolas Sarkozy’s policies and is owned by corporate tycoon and politician Serge Dassault. In the letter, the journalists further requested that the newspaper include “diverse opinions for a more comprehensive examination of issues” and argued against “sweeping facts under the rug in light of political machinations.”

This outcry prompts some in Korea to examine endemic issues afflicting their own media. In fact, in the latest Press Freedom Indices (PFI) released by the organization Reporters without Borders, South Korea ranks a full six places lower than France at 44th overall, which is also just below Botswana. Considering how South Korea’s PFI rankings from before 2008 were generally in the 30’s range, and that American think-tank Freedom House labels the South Korean press as only “partly free,” the results seem all the more alarming.

Why? Aside from the ever-increasing, oftentimes naively obvious suppression of sources deemed critical of the government by prosecutors and the police (as with the recent arrest of opposition politician Jeong Bong-ju of the I am a Ggomsu fame), Korea has increasingly been characterized by a stagnant media atmosphere dominated by conglomerates and the government. This can be attributed to historical factors, such as the traditional (and current) domination of the public share by rightist, corporate media such as the “Cho-Joong-Dong” (Chosun, Joongang and Dong-a) newspaper triad under successive authoritarian governments. Though the subsequent democratization process has alleviated this significantly with the establishment of independent leftist media outlets, the Lee Myung-bak administration is vigorously undermining this diversity.

This attitude is most apparent if one tracks the changes that have occurred with television. The most significant of these was the controversial 2010 amendment to media law, which opened the door for newspaper corporations such as the Cho-Joong-Dong – only after government approval - to install their own networks with the so-called “Comprehensively Organized Broadcast” (COB) channels. The results have in effect proved that “media-liberalization” was nothing short of an excuse to facilitate the takeover of the market by pro-government press. So far, no less than six new rightist cable channels have established a foothold. The takeover of terrestrial television channels by government cronies (“parachute personalities”) – an idée fixe in Korean politics – also facilitated the management of public opinion. As of 2010, the presidents of all major channels such as MBC, KBS and SBS have been replaced with political allies. Concomitantly all programs deemed too critical of the government have led to suitable arrests of persons and/or outright cancellations, giving rise to intermittent strikes and protests by the staff.

Korea’s vibrant Internet forums plus its diverse media have largely remained intact. Leftist newspapers are still going strong while alternate forms of “subversive” media such as social networking services and podcasts are flourishing. However, as long as any post-Lee government has at its disposal the means to force non-independent journalists to do their bidding, media freedom can only remain figurative at best. Moreover, although Le Figaro’s executives have largely snubbed the demands of their staff, it must be remembered that the journalists had been able to voice their discontent through a legal organization that is the norm in Europe: the journalists’ union. Only such bold legislative measures can ensure the independence of the media.