Seoul: The revised Information and Communications Network Act has officially taken effect today, amid ongoing controversy and concerns that it could suppress freedom of expression in South Korea. The new legislation introduces stringent measures against the dissemination of "false or fabricated information" online, targeting news organizations, YouTubers, and influencers with punitive damages up to five times the actual damages if they are found to have knowingly distributed such content.
According to Yonhap News Agency, the act permits authorities to impose administrative penalties of up to 1 billion won ($652,000) on those who redistribute content deemed illegal, false, or fabricated through court rulings or final decisions. Large platform operators with over 1 million daily users, including Naver and Kakao, are now required to set up reporting channels for such information and take corrective actions upon receiving reports, with a mandate to disclose how these reports are handled.
The legislation, labeled by critics as the "online gag law," was passed by the ruling Democratic Party of Korea last December, citing the necessity to curb fake news. However, it faced backlash for its vague regulatory standards and excessive penalties, leading to fears that it could be weaponized by politicians, officials, and corporations to silence media and content creators through Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation.
There is also significant apprehension about the impact on ordinary internet users, who worry that a single misjudged comment could result in substantial financial liabilities. The determination of what constitutes false information is assigned to a fact-checking body supported by the Korea Media and Communications Commission. This organization's independence is questioned due to its government funding, raising concerns about potential biases in its judgments.
Platform operators are pressured to remove controversial content to avoid legal repercussions, a move that critics argue could lead to self-censorship. The revised act has been criticized for potentially favoring a specific political agenda, given its vague definitions and the lack of independence in its enforcement mechanisms.
While the goal of curbing misinformation is widely supported, the act's harsh penalties may lead to preemptive self-censorship, stifling free speech and criticism. Critics argue that the revised act could be exploited to suppress dissent against the government and political figures, calling for further amendments to address potential constitutional issues.