hankyoreh

A poster for a mask sharing campaign (provided by the Seoul Metropolitan Government)

Amid the coronavirus pandemic, the world has turned its attention to South Korea’s methods of social cooperation. The world’s top media outlets and the leaders and officials of countries around the world are curious to know how civil society and the government can cooperate to actively practice prevention and isolation, how information and communications technology (ICT) and data can be used for infection management and contact tracing without complete lockdowns, and how South Korea continues to conduct widespread testing and treatment.

As even countries with the world’s most advanced healthcare systems have helplessly watched their early response efforts fail, more and more are adopting the South Korean response model. A joint government teleconference was held early this month after an urgent request from Germany, which inquired in detail about South Korea’s disease control system and use of smartphones in disease prevention. It is shocking to see a nation as advanced as Germany turning to the South Korean government for advice. What has enabled South Korea to become the global standard in the space of just a couple of months are our unprecedented flows of communication.

To begin with, South Korea has recruited a variety of experts and data sources to gather ideas for public disease control. Early on in the outbreak, when societal anxiety and uncertainty were running high, citizens began using public data to create and share methods of overcoming the crisis through creative ways of information sharing. For instance, ideas like apps for tracking the movements of diagnosed patients, the five-day pharmacy-based mask provision system, apps with information about mask availability, and social distancing campaigns began out of voluntary engagement by the public.

Second, ideas that could easily have remained in the private sector have been swiftly adopted and utilized in the public sector, while information has been provided in a transparent manner through regular briefings. As the public’s ideas have been rapidly accepted and put into practice, the scale and direction of the response to the national crisis have been determined.

Third, even with new rules applying to work, leisure, family and human relationships, and social life amid the recommendations for non-face-to-face communication, there has been a large movement to minimize inconveniences and complaints and focus on alternatives and problem-solving. Through the use of ICT, distancing has been calmly accepted as a social norm, and people have offered encouragement to one another. We’ve also seen grass-roots movements such as citizen-led fundraising efforts, volunteering, and mask forfeiting campaigns.

At the same time, there are certain parties who have barely participated at all in this cooperation process. I’m speaking of certain media outlets that have been stirring up uncertainty and anxiety, continuously creating frames of discrimination and hatred with labels like “Wuhan pneumonia” and “the China virus.” Some of the “reporting” has bordered on the perverse with its encouragement of social divisions, conflict, and fear. Were it not for the foreign press, we would have no idea how well South Korean has responded to the outbreak.

I haven’t envied Europe’s disease control system, but I’ve been quite envious of the foreign press’s calm, fact-based, non-sensational reporting and its attitude toward readers. An example of this is the British daily The Guardian, which published a column last month titled “The Guardian’s Promise to Our Readers” in which it shared the principles of its coronavirus reporting. Editor-in-chief Katharine Viner pledged to provide factual reporting based on expertise and scientific knowledge; a global standard of reporting on means of helping one another; reporting that calls for responsible crisis management by world leaders without ignoring those who are poor and marginalized; and reporting that shares the voices of health workers and tracking information to help understand the causes and prevention of cluster infections. This sort of attitude from the press, with its valuing of reader voices and commitment to finally sharing hope, is quite different from South Korea’s.

The cooperative communication in South Korean civil society that so many countries have become curious about may be an adaptation from distrust in the press. It’s no accident that these fact-based information formats have been developed by citizens themselves and communicated to disease control authorities. Inaccurate and negative media reports pose a greater threat to our survival than any viral infection.

By Choi Seon-yeong, visiting professor at Yonsei University’s Graduate School of Communication and Arts

Please direct comments or questions to [english@hani.co.kr]