MunhwaMetrics

Explore press freedom through data.

​South Korea’s sharp decline in the 2024 Reporters Without Borders (RSF) World Press Freedom Index from 47th to 62nd place reflects a variety of factors. From political interference, legal pressures, and institutional erosion under President Yoon Suk-yeol’s administration, to statistics on continuous surveillance, we’ll take a thorough look at Korea’s press freedom status.

So why the fall?

  1. Political interference and retaliation against media
    The Yoon administration has been criticized for targeting critical media outlets. Notably, after MBC reported on a controversial hot mic incident involving President Yoon, the government responded with police raids on journalists’ homes and barred MBC from presidential events. Such actions have been perceived as retaliatory measures against unfavorable coverage .​
  2. Legal action against journalists
    There has been an uptick in legal actions against journalists and media organizations. For instance, in 2022, the ruling People Power Party filed defamation lawsuits against journalists from public broadcasters for their reporting on President Yoon.

    In September 2023, a whistleblower reported that Ryu Hee-rim, then the chair of the Korea Communications Standards Commission (KCSC), had enlisted his family and acquaintances to file civilian petitions with the commission against Newstapa. Newstapa is a left-leaning online news outlet that had previously reported on a corruption scandal involving President Yoon Suk-yeol.
  3. Retaliatory fines
    Media outlets, especially smaller, online-based enterprises such as Newstapa and Voice of Seoul, were subjected to retaliatory investigations, raids, and access restrictions after reporting critically on the president, the first lady, and the administration.

RSF’s World Press Freedom Index evaluates countries based on five indicators: political context, legal framework, economic context, sociocultural context, and safety of journalists. These indicators are assessed through expert surveys and data on abuses against journalists .​

Understanding RSF’s Press Freedom Index Methodology

RSF’s World Press Freedom Index evaluates countries based on five indicators: political context, legal framework, economic context, sociocultural context, and safety of journalists. These indicators are assessed through expert surveys and data on abuses against journalists.​

In 2024, RSF noted a global decline in the political indicator, with an average drop of 7.6 points, highlighting increased political pressure on journalism worldwide.

While comprehensive, this methodology has faced critiques for its reliance on subjective assessments and potential cultural biases. Academic analyses suggest that while RSF’s approach provides valuable insights, it may not fully capture the nuances of each country’s media environment. ​Countries like Korea, where journalists face little direct violence but many repressive fees, retaliatory fines, and gag-order legal action, make it difficult to accurately track press freedom.

A timeline of Korean legislature on press freedom.

Tracking direct and indirect impacts on our press.

  • 1948 – National Security Act (NSA)

    • Enacted to suppress pro-North Korean activities, the NSA criminalizes expressions deemed to “praise” or “incite” anti-state groups.
    • Critics argue that the law has been used to limit freedom of expression and suppress dissenting voices.

  • 1953 – Criminal Act: Articles 307–312 (Defamation and Insult)

    • Establishes defamation and insult as criminal offenses, punishable by imprisonment or fines.
    • Notably, even truthful statements can be subject to criminal liability if deemed not in the public interest.

  • 2001 – Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection (Network Act)

    • Introduces provisions for cyber defamation, imposing stricter penalties for defamatory statements made online.
    • Aims to address growing concerns over online harassment and misinformation.

  • 2011 – Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA)

    • Enacted to strengthen data privacy rights, PIPA is considered one of the world’s strictest privacy regimes.
    • Applies to both public and private sectors, imposing significant obligations on data handlers.

  • 2021 – Proposed Amendments to the Press Arbitration Act

    • Aimed to introduce punitive damages for media outlets publishing false or manipulated reports.
    • Faced strong opposition from journalists and civil society, who viewed it as a threat to press freedom.
    • The proposal was eventually shelved due to public backlash.

  • 2022 – Constitutional Court Review of the National Security Act

    • The Constitutional Court initiated a review of the NSA’s constitutionality, responding to multiple petitions and ongoing criticism from legal scholars and press freedom advocates.