hankyoreh

The Korea Communications Commission’s (KCC) disclosure of detailed assessment marks from a review conducted last December for the selection of providers for general programming and news networks has sparked a growing controversy over perceived bias in the assessments. Recently, Democratic Party Lawmaker Choi Moon-soon revealed a document he had received from the KCC showing assessment details from the evaluation committee. The document shows the assessment outcome in somewhat more detail than the information given by the KCC with the announcement of providers, and certain suspect areas stand out. For this reason, it is justifiable that some are alleging the review was conducted in a way favorable to the pro-Lee Myung-bak administration Chosun Ilbo, JoongAng Ilbo, and Dong-A Ilbo newspapers.
The committee conducted an assessment in five major areas: the first was public responsibility, fairness, and public interest, the second program planning and composition and production plans, the third organization and workforce management and management plans, the fourth financial and technical capabilities, and the fifth support plans for the advancement of broadcasting. Among these, measurable categories such as financial capabilities were given low weight in the evaluation, while areas with a significant potential for subjective interpretation, including fairness and public interest in addition to programming planning and composition were given significant weight. Moreover, the actual difference in marks between companies was larger in the subjective assessment categories than in the measurable ones.
The area with the largest discrepancy was the one dealing with program planning and composition and production plans. To see the information submitted by companies on this item, which has to do with factors such as the direction of programming and plans for collaboration on program production, it is difficult to avoid questions over whether the assessment was conducted properly. For instance, the Chosun Ilbo gave “programs that will startle viewers,” while the JoongAng Ilbo gave the goal of “viewer-centered global smart media” and the Dong-A Ilbo gave “high-class broadcasting.” These companies also made sure to present plans for co-productions with foreign networks, an area where close examination is difficult during the review process. In this category, the three conservative newspapers placed first through third, while the lowest ranking company, Taekwang Industrial, received more than 16 percent fewer points than the first place finisher.
Another highlighted problem is the fact that only two of the fourteen review committee members had any expertise in broadcasting. There are a number of other questionable findings, such as the fact that Taekwang Industrial, with its abundant cable network operation experience, placed dead last in the technical capability category, or that the three conservative newspapers finished first through third in the category of public responsibility, fairness, and public interest as well.
The suspicious review findings appear likely to further stir up the fairness debate that arose immediately after the announcement of providers. The KCC bears the responsibility for clearly dispelling these suspicions by releasing all the details of its review findings.
　　
Please direct questions or comments to [englishhani@hani.co.kr]