What is the "Media Law"?

What is the “Media Law” bill? There are so many components to it, but the three most controversial parts are as follows:

1. Revising the current newspaper law in order to allow newspaper companies to own broadcast networks. (Cross Media Ownership)

2. Revising the broadcast law to allow newspaper companies and large private companies to own shares in a broadcast network.

3. The obligatory monitoring of internet content and provisions to prosecute persons engaged in carrying out so-called “cyber-insults”

The GNP party promotes this bill claiming this will create 26,000 jobs, while pointing out that cross-media ownership is permitted in other developed countries. Those opposed to the bill argue that the claims of job creation by the proposed Media Law are groundless and that the real purpose of the bill is to enable the government and conservatives (though not traditional conservatives, for Korean conservatives don’t have consistant opinions and change their position to suit whatever is beneficial to them!) to control media.

Representative A from GNP party, on a phone interview with MBC, said, “Having a public discussion was suggested within the party but representative Jung opposed it saying it will bring more controversy if we do so.”

The GNP party refuses to hold any public discussion of the bill or to educate the public about it, insisting instead on passing the bill by providing inaccurate information and repeating lies to the public.

On Dec. 4, 2008, the Joong-Ang newspaper reported that “cross media ownership is a worldwide trend and among OECD countries, Korea is the only country prohibiting it.” However, the OECD website clearly states that “There are also cross-media stipulations in 21 OECD countries, which set restrictions on cross-media ownership by acquisition.”

Also, representative Taehee Im from GNP party said on Dec. 26, 2008 that, “the current newspaper and broadcasting laws are what ‘those people’ (indicates Woori or Minjoo party) rushed through without our consent.”

But the truth is that the current broadcasting law and the newspaper laws were passed in 1999 and in 2005 respectively according to standard congressional procedures in the presence of all parties.

Secondly, allowing large companies and newspaper companies to own shares in a broadcast network poses another big problem. Even though each company is only permitted to own up to 20% of the shares of any network, if Samsung Corporation, Joong-Ang newspaper (a close media ally of Samsung), and Chosun newspaper (a supportor of the conservative GNP government) each were to buy 20% of MBC’s shares, then control of MBC will effectively pass to them. Since the acquisition of shares cannot be reversed even after this president’s term is over, president Lee MyeongBak and the ruling GNP party wants to pass the bill while they hold power, this despite of the opposition of the public and the broadcast networks themselves.

Now, let’s see what would happen if the bill is passed.

In 2007, there was a huge oil spill off the southwest coast of Korea. It turned out to have been caused by Samsung Heavy Industries, one of the subsidiaries of Samsung. The chart above shows how many times different Korean newspapers reported on the responsibility of Samsung Heavy Industries. While Hangyeoreh and Kyoung-hyang newspapers reported 18 and 6 times respectively, Chosun only did so on 4 occasions, and Dong-a newspaper only once. Joong-ang newspaper, however, didn’t even report on it at all. As you can see, if the media is controlled by Chosun, Dong-a, and Joong-ang newspapers, it will be hard to hear about facts, especially those “inconvenient” to their political and corporate allies. This is only one example: these three newspapers never reported fairly on the anti-government movement that has arisen since the current president’s inauguration.

Thirdly, this bill also includes Internet monitoring which would be done by the police and prosecutors in the name of preventing ‘defamation’. If, for example, I were to criticize Samsung on my blog, under the current system Samsung would have to file a lawsuit against me if they find what I write insulting. However, after the bill passes, the police would be able to prosecute me even without a complaint from Samsung.

It seems that this bill is being promoted by the GNP party and the government in order to control the citizens who use Internet to criticize the government’s policies and the way the GNP party runs the country. This will provide a legal justification for the oppression of citizens already being perpetrated by the current government, the police, and government prosecutors. This was the case when the police refused to do anything to stop pro-government groups from breaking the censer stand during the funeral of former president Roh. Instead, the police saw it fit to arrest 30 citizens who tried to clean up the broken censer stand! Clearly this government will not apply the law fairly, but will instead use it to persecute its critics. They claim that they want to follow in the tracks of developed countries in duplicating their successes, but their proposed policies would seem follow more closely the tracks laid out in the internet policies of China and North Korea.

Instead of fostering democratization and economic development, the government with this bill really seeks to ensure long-term GNP party rule in the parliament by allowing the Chosun, Joong-ang, and Dong-a newspapers to enter the broadcast network market and tape over the mouths of our vocal citizens. This is why the bill should not be passed.

(translated from http://danbisw.tistory.com/4992)

Message regarding the Korean "Media Law"

The Korean parliament just passed the "Media Law" bill ILLEGALLY, and this video urges the viewers to help stop the GNP party from passing the bill in several different languages.

An eulogy for President Roh, Moohyun

There was someone who

Tried to be an ordinary citizen while being a president

Tried to be righteous while being a politician

Tried to be with the have-nots while having power

Lived like a fool while being wise

Pursued what he believed until his life and death met.

Having Loved him while once hating him

We leave him in our hearts saying goodbye to him.

-Jiyoung Gong (novelist)

대통령이면서 시민이고자 했고

정치인이면서 정의롭고자 했으며

권력을 잡고도 힘없는 자 편에서

현자였으나 바보로 살아

마침내 삶과 죽음까지 하나가 되도록

온몸으로 그것을 밀고 갔던

한 사람이 있으니

그를 미워하면서 사랑했던 우리는

이제 그를 보내며 영원히 우리 마음에 그를 남긴다.

-공지영(소설가)

Health Care Experience in Korea and the U.S.

In July 2007 I fractured my foot in the U.S., and got almost everything covered by the insurance I had except for co-payment which was $25 each time I saw a doctor. I was lucky to have health insurance which had just taken effect. When I talked about my injury, my mom told me for the first time about “my” life insurance which she had been putting money into for me and that it might give me money for the injury. She looked through a booklet of coverage, and found out that I was eligible for $300 of compensation. I faxed the orthopedics' diagnosis and got my money sent to my Korean bank account.

My orthodontist in the U.S. recommended me to have my wisdom teeth removed. I could have paid a couple hundred dollars if I had done it here because my dental insurance only covered 60% or 90% of the cost. I decided to have it done in Korea, and it cost me less than $20 because it was covered by health insurance. The service I got wasn’t supposed to be covered by the insurance, though, because my wisdom teeth weren’t hurting me. According to them, it was more of an aesthetic procedure. But since the physician I visited was my brother’s orthodontist and my brother had brought him so much business by recommending him to friends, he was being nice to me.

This past spring when I visited him again for cavities between my front teeth, the dentist had to use “resin” to fill in which is the same color as natural teeth and expensive! Even though my cavity treatment was “necessary,” resin was not covered by the insurance because it is an aesthetic material. But I couldn’t use silver amalgam for my front teeth, could I? I paid $200 this time. I think it could’ve cost less in the U.S. with dental insurance, actually I could have paid nothing for it with the dental insurance I used to have.

Health Insurance in Korea

These days a lot of people are talking about health care reform, and looking at other countries of what works and what doesn't. I wanted to share a bit of my experience with health insurance coverage in both Korea and the U.S. The U.S. people are looking overseas for examples of the national health care systems that might work well. Strangely, the current Korean government are hoping to copy the American system by allowing private sector in the health insurance market.

Here's a table showing the forms of health care coverage used by the Korean people. Some people get health insurance through employment where your employer pays 50% of the cost and you pay the other half. The cost is 5.08% of your salary. If you are self-employed or live in a less developed part of the country, you pay based on your income and property. And if you make not much money, you are covered by the government.

(As of 2007. 12. 31)

Types		Population (thousands)	%
National Health Insurance	employee insured	29,420	59.2
	self-employed insured	18,400	37.1
	subtotal	47,820	96.3
Korean “Medicaid”	A type	1060	2.1
	B type	790	1.6
	subtotal	1850	3.7
Total		49,670	100

(http://www.mohw.go.kr)

The Korean National Health Insurance Program only covers necessary medical services including dental treatment. It doesn’t cover aesthetic treatment mostly in dentistry and dermatology.

I have two forms of health insurance. One is the national health insurance as a dependent of my parents (it doesn’t matter how old you are), and the other is through a private injury insurance company. You have to buy injury insurance by paying $20+ monthly for 10-20 years depending on the program you are enrolled. My parents signed up for me just in case I get badly hurt or die abroad. My beneficiary will get about $100,000 if I die or I will get tens of thousands of dollars if I get disabled while I pay the monthly fee. You will get certain percentage of the money you have put in when it matures. I assume I would get nearly all that I (my parents) put in back, otherwise my parents wouldn’t have done it.

It doesn’t cost much to see a doctor in Korea. It costs less than $10 to see a specialist, and cold medicine (different types of pills for each packet) for a week costs about $5-7. Insurance doesn’t cover some medicine for rare disease. One thing I don’t like is the “selective treatment” which allows patients to choose a physician to see with a fee. In the U.S., you see either whoever is available at the time or the doctor you want to see with no additional cost. In Korea, if you choose a doctor to see, you are charged $10 for it. But, sometimes you have to “choose” the doctor you saw last time for a follow-up, you don’t have any other option and still pay extra. Some years ago, I had to see an internal medicine doctor at a mid-sized hospital in my neighborhood. There was only one internal medicine doctor working at that hospital and the receptionist “chose” the doctor for me. I don’t mind paying extra to see good doctors but why do I need to pay $10 when there’s no options to choose? Hospitals try to get more money out of patients for doctor visits or medicine sales with loopholes because they can’t make enormous amount of money under the current health insurance program, and the government tries to find out unjust us

age of the system mostly when claims are filed by patients. I wondered if the “selective treatment” fee should be applied in my case.

Here's what happens when you visit a hospital. You go to the reception desk, tell him/her which department you hope to visit. You will be given a form to fill out and when you are done, you hand out the form and your insurance card which lists the names of the family members insured by the same source (either through employment or government) and their SSNs. The last few years when I visited doctors in Korea, I found out that you don't need to bring the card because everything is computerized and they can search the insurance information by your SSN on their computer.

You will be given some paper forms and the doctor's name, and have to wait in front of the doctor's office. If you go to a doctor's clinic, you wait no more than 20 minutes. But many people want to see a doctor at a university hospital, where you have to wait for hours to get a 5 minute consultation (as far as I know, doctors are paid by the number of patients you see daily). I don't see much difference on visiting a doctor between Korea and the U.S. The only difference is whether you need to show the insurance card or not.

Let's learn Korean vowels!

I think this video explains the structure of Korean vowels well.