PM Nominee and ethics of news gathering

On the front page in its Tuesday issue, the Hankook Ilbo carried an article entitled “The newspaper’s position on the stir over the disclosure of a recorded tape of Prime Minister Nominee Lee Wan-koo’s remarks.” The article was an explanation on the process of how KBS television network carried on Friday a report on contents of the recorded tape containing Lee’s remarks that effectively suggested he could telephone senior editors at media organizations to remove stories on him or influence reporters’ personnel management at those media firms, while having lunch with four reporters on Jan. 27. The Hankook Ilbo did not carry a report on Lee’s remarks that were secretively recorded by its own reporter who attended the luncheon. Instead, the reporter provided the recorded file to the office of Rep. Kim Kyung-hyup of the main opposition New Politics Alliance for Democracy, which in turn handed it over to KBS. This is how controversy over Lee’s alleged media control flared up.

“We seriously considered doing a story, judging that the prime minister nominee’s view of the media was problematic, but we chose to put off reporting on the issue, because Lee was extremely agitated over suspicions over his second son’s exemption of military duty at the time and made the remarks spontaneously at an unofficial occasion,” the daily said. “Regardless of the process and cause, providing the entire file containing records from news gathering activities to a political party was an act that significantly violated ethics of news gathering. Recording his remarks without winning consent from the speaker was inappropriate as well.”

If the Hankook Ilbo did not file a report on the issue based on judgment in line with its own reporting standards, it is not an act that deserves criticism. It may be also true for the daily to claim that it did not carry a report to protect Lee, or it handed over the recorded tape to the main opposition party to intentionally smear him. Nonetheless, in the process of the issue flowing through the political circle to another media organization, the article failed to adequately explain problems with internal communications, ethics of news gathering and judgment on whether to report a matter or not, rather than addressing the issue on its own.

The stir has erupted due to Lee’s ill-advised view of the media, in which he judges that he could control the media if he wishes just like the period of dictatorial governments in the past. However, the media has disappointed the public as well. Even when the reporter concerned and his senior editor had different judgment on a certain issue, they should have discussed or made appeal, and shouldn`t have behaved like people dealing in information. If the newspaper is to play its due role to serve public interest in our society, it should use caution in many ways.