A Discourse on the Press, Politics, and Content
The public's view of the press isn't kind.
Of course, it wasn't always like this.
The press started losing its position when the imported media format called social networks went mainstream.
The press, honestly, did nothing wrong. If there's any fault at all, it's 'not that they did something wrong, but that they did nothing at all.'. (Footnote: this is an extremely important point. Former presidents and existing industries run into trouble on the same issue. As the market and the times change, common sense and expectations around each role keep shifting. Things that weren't considered problems in the past are now being newly defined as problems, and, the other way around, plenty of things once dismissed as problems are being revisited as legitimate. Right and wrong, justice and injustice — they're shifting within a single generation.)
Sometimes information delivered through social & media channels is faster and more accurate than the news or newspapers from public broadcasters (Footnote: it makes sense — a reporter is a messenger who relays an event. So they can't be experts in every single thing in the world. When a specific incident occurs, covering it as it is requires rigorous additional study on their part. Totally natural. Meanwhile, when individuals can share information, the situation gets worse: if the parties involved in the event — economic issues, international disputes, cases that need a blend of sharp domain expertise — can share directly, professional objectivity faces its limits. You end up in the sad position of competing with social media posts made by individuals.).
This is what we call the era of the New Normal.
Journalists once strapped a single camera around their neck and risked their lives roaming the battlefield,
trying, no matter what, to deliver information to the whole world as quickly as possible. That core essence of the press has started to crack.
Broadcasting is one thing, but print newspapers — no words needed.
To the general public this might not feel like a big deal, but it's actually a huge event.
It's hard to feel it, really.. I think some analogies from different angles would help.
For example, dropping from 4th to 5th place, vs. going from long-time 1st to 2nd — these are completely different situations, aren't they?
It might be the kind of dilemma a major actor or a singer who defined an era faces when deciding whether to appear on a variety show.
It might be similar to when middle and high school students trust their hagwon instructors more than their school teachers.
Or maybe it's like when adults, who used to always have answers for kids' questions, now have to ask the kids how to use their smartphone or computer or media.
Kind of like the colonial era, when adults who didn't know Japanese had to ask the kids.
Or the situation in the 40s-50s when adults who didn't know Hangul asked children.
Going further afield, maybe it's like America — long holder of first place for decades — now flustered by a China it can feel right behind or already ahead.
Our generation is wedged right in the middle of these daily hegemonies collapsing or being reshuffled.
And just as in all the examples above, the press now seems to have adapted.
Recently, the press feels like it has positioned itself as entertainment.
Cutting-edge graphics, performances, mobile web, apps, the anchors' and reporters' styles — there's no shortage of spectacle and fun.
The print space they once monopolized — nobody looks at it anymore.
In the digital-device market they entered late, they can't afford to let up for a single second.
To win readers' attention, clicks, shares, or comments, they've started to use any means necessary.
Hate comments? Doesn't matter.
In this market, the click itself is money.
They've stepped right into the entertainment market, where even noise marketing counts as strategy.
The variety of ads and link banners is already no different from the banners on shopping malls or portal sites.
For the press, there's no greater fear than a quiet world.
It's like if the whole world helped each other out and lived happily, the judges and lawyers would go broke.
It's like if every young person and parent in the country could have their own home, real estate tycoons would be the most miserable.
Or there's no greater fear than North Korea pursuing peace — at least for far-right Japan, the US, and parts of the domestic right.
Actually, this kind of situation shows up in everyday life too — you don't have to drag in the press or politics.
Like working overtime every day, singing the praises of leaving on time~ and then finally getting out on time, only to stand there blank — now what?
Or a patient with a broken leg who just wants to be discharged, and then, once discharged, starts wishing the athlete's foot would clear up faster.
Why does this irony happen?
Because they're face-to-face with a situation where the reason content exists has been flipped upside down.
It's close to an everyday Black Swan situation.
Took a long way to get here, but now the main point.
Watching the way recent mainstream press and the main opposition party's politics keep running on sensational, ideologically driven words and attitudes,
I found myself thinking this.
Reading the comments,
there's a brawl between the Sooja (defenders) who know well the press's original constructive role and want to protect it, and the honest majority who want to judge based on a standard of justice.
Sometimes this stirs up a bigger issue than the incident the press is actually covering.
Can we really criticize them morally? Is there any point in responding, fact-checking, demanding corrections — is it worth it?
It's a waste. The sunk cost is actually greater.
Maybe they did their best where they stood. You can't really blame them. The ground they stand on and rely on is just different, that's all.
They've intuitively sensed the collapse of their original essence and the content built on top of it — their reason for being — and they're flailing. No one's voice reaches them. They have to survive. The more they thrash, the deeper they sink — and they don't know it, because they're in a victim's mindset where a helping hand looks like pointing fingers and a rescue pole looks like a switch.
I get it. They live better. They have lived better. It's unfair. The victims are people like me, the public. Why should we be the ones to do this?
Better than a hate comment is no comment at all.
In judging the killer, I hope we ourselves don't become killers. Maybe, if you think about it coolly, if we went back in time and our positions had been swapped over those years, we might not be any different. Because they're also living people with a will to live.
So what should we do?
Those press outlets and politicians need to return to their original essence.
Return from entertainment to press.
Politics is the same. Do politics for policy, not for attention-grabbing.
A little while ago it was impossible. I'll admit it. But now, it's possible.
Right now, most of the press is entertainment and many politicians act like celebrities, which makes
this the perfect time for going back to essence to become the ONLY ONE.
And
on that returned ground of essence, new content has to be built.
Avengers would be the perfect reference here.
The old Avengers drew villains out of Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, etc.
But even for them, a world without villains would have been hell.
They struggled for a while. Everyone knows this.
But they ended up with greater success. Because they changed the paradigm of evil.
They left for space. Sometimes they dive deep into extremely personal and philosophical territory.
I think the press and politics are no different.
It's the in-between era right now. But past glory can still be regained —
through new content.
Without doing noise marketing through bad habits, nonsense, and provocative rhetoric,
they can still win public attention and trust honestly and with dignity.
There's a saying that it takes someone who has tasted success to do it again. I hope they stop falling into an inferiority complex that ends up playing out losing moves.
