South Korean Chaebol Fails to See the Funny Side of Briton’s Humor Column

Just when you thought it was safe to have a sense of humor when writing about South Korea, you find out it really, really isn’t. The latest journalist to fall foul of South Korea’s media paranoia is a former regular member of the FCCJ: Mike Breen.

Breen, a South Korea veteran, writes for The Korea Times and like many British journalists, he likes to be funny. Brits like to make fun of themselves and perhaps foolishly assume that others do the same. Brits also like to make fun of other nationalities, but humor does not always translate well, and some countries are hypersensitive to anything said about them, in jest or otherwise.

Of course, some people/countries are just plain humorless. The phrase “water off a duck’s back” doesn’t apply to certain institutions, people or companies – especially in South Korea, a country known to be very, very sensitive to negative media reports.

Breen fell afoul of Samsung, one of South Korea’s chaebol and a cornerstone of the South Korean economy.

Breen’s “offense” came in a jokey Christmas column in which he speculated what certain people might send out as Christmas presents. According to the Los Angeles Times report that broke the story internationally:

“One item read that Samsung had sent to all employees photographs of the son of the firm’s chairman with instructions for hanging the photo next to one of his father – an allusion to North Korea’s Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il.

“Breen also wrote that Samsung, ‘the rock upon which the Korean economy rests, sent traditional year-end cards offering best wishes for 2010 to the country’s politicians, prosecutors and journalists along with [$50,000] gift certificates.’ ”

A MAN WITH CONVICTIONS

The writer of the L.A. Times story, John M. Glionna, points out that Samsung’s chairman, Lee Kun Hee, was convicted of bribing two former South Korean presidents (in 1990) and of tax evasion (in 2008). Lee was granted a federal pardon in the former case, and current South Korean President Lee Myung Bak granted the Samsung boss a pardon for the tax evasion case on Dec. 29.

That same day, Samsung’s chairman sued The Korea Times, its top editor and Breen for $1 million.

The paper subsequently published two “clarifications,” one of which reportedly was written by Samsung officials.

Samsung subsequently dropped the lawsuit against the paper and its editor, and the civil suit against Breen, but is still pursuing criminal libel charges against the 57-year-old Briton.

Samsung may be within its rights to sue, but you have to figure that its PR department is staffed by really, really stupid people. As website techdirt.com points out:

“… the stories about Samsung’s corruption and bribery scandals are pretty widely known. Nothing in that column was going to change that. … Outside of South Korea, filing this ridiculous, petty and vindictive lawsuit over a joke is much more likely to harm Samsung’s reputation than the original column (which was probably barely read outside of South Korea). And, doesn’t something seem completely wrong when Samsung seems more concerned that its reputation will be harmed more by satire about its well-known and well-documented bribery and corruption scandals than the actual bribery and corruption scandals.”

Techdirt continues: “The article also notes how this is basically a sign of how dominant Samsung is in South Korea, and how it more or less has power over the newspapers, suggesting that no one is ever willing to criticize them – and that it’s really using this lawsuit as a warning shot. If true, that’s a huge shame for South Korea.”

BOOK SLAMS SAMSUNG

Samsung has also come under fire in a book titled Think Samsung, written by the company’s former top lawyer, Kim Yong Chul, according to a New York Times report in April. The Times’ report says Kim’s book accuses Samsung Chairman Lee “and his loyal aides of having stolen as much as 10 trillion won, or $9 billion, from Samsung subsidiaries and stashed it in stock and bank accounts illegally opened in the names of executives.”

The report continues: “The book alleges that they shredded books, fabricated evidence and bribed politicians, bureaucrats, prosecutors, judges and journalists, mainly to ensure that they would not stand in the way of Mr. Lee’s illegal transfer of corporate control to his only son, Lee Jae-yong, 41.

“In his book, Mr. Kim depicts Mr. Lee and ‘vassal’ executives at Samsung as bribing thieves who ‘lord over’ the country, its government and media. He portrays prosecutors as opportunists who are ruthless to those they regard as ‘dead’ powers, like a former president, but subservient to and afraid of Samsung, which he calls the ‘power that never dies.’

“‘I wanted to leave a record of Samsung’s corruption because prosecutors’ investigation turned it into historical gossip,’ Mr. Kim said. ‘I wrote this book because I was afraid that children would grow up believing that in South Korea, justice does not win, but those who win become justice.’

“The book has sold 120,000 copies so far – an unusually good performance in South Korea for a nonfiction work.”

Curiously, Samsung has declined to sue its former lawyer, who not only is spoiling for a fight, but also says he was complicit in the company’s wrongdoings. “I am challenging them to slap my face, to file a libel suit against me, but they don’t,” the report quotes Kim as saying.

Samsung’s brilliant PR department has alluded to the book as being “a pile of excrement.”

Despite selling 120,000 copies, hardly any mention of the book gets into the mainstream media in South Korea. One media outlet admitted to killing a favorable report of the book for fear of losing advertising revenue.

In a Korea Times column from 2008, Yonsei University professor Park Kyu Tae said it was time for the chaebol to live up to their social responsibilities.

“Our society places a taboo on talking about Samsung as it is damaging to the economy. … Korean business groups, or family-run chaebol, should learn a valuable lesson from the Samsung scandal. They should make the utmost effort to ensure fair competition, transparency and accountability. It is also time for them to take more social responsibility and abide by global standards.”

The consequences of not doing so were spelt out in blunt terms by a report on gizmodo.com:

“Samsung is very much a global company. And while attacking Breen for aggressive satire may deter other Korean humorists from impugning Samsung’s reputation, this bald attack on the basic freedoms of speech and of the press could do untold PR damage worldwide. At least, one hopes it does.”

U.N. ENVOY BLASTS SOUTH KOREA

But there are signs that South Korea is getting worse, not better. U.N. Special Rapporteur Frank La Rue made a 12-day visit to the country in May to check on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression in the country. Curiously, not one senior government official thought him worthy of a meeting – even though he was invited by the government – and there were some reports that he was followed by South Korea’s secret service during his visit.

Of course, if government officials wanted to know what he was thinking, they only had to read his damning final report. Even in the diplomatic world of U.N. politics, La Rue did not pull any punches:

“I would like to express my deep disappointment given the critical importance of freedom of opinion and expression in building strong democratic States that I could not meet with the President, the Prime Minister, nor a single Minister of Government. In addition, despite my requests, I was unable to meet with the Prosecutor General in the exercise of my mandate.

“… I am concerned that in recent years, there has been a shrinking space for freedom of expression in the Republic of Korea, primarily due to new and more restrictive interpretations and application of existing laws. … I would like to caution that the increasing number of prosecutions creates a chilling effect to exercise the right to freedom of expression.”

La Rue goes on to cite cases of abuse where individuals have been censored to protect private enterprises. He also reflects critically on the harsh defamation laws that Breen, among others, is suffering under:

“States should abolish all criminal defamation laws. The threat of harsh criminal sanctions, especially imprisonment, exerts a profound chilling effect on freedom of expression. I recommend the Government to remove the crime of defamation from its Criminal Code, and to promote a culture of tolerance regarding criticism.”

For Breen, a “culture of tolerance” can’t come quick enough. He’ll know more than anyone he shouldn’t hold his breath. South Korea’s track record of industrial innovation has yet to be matched in the fields of social awareness, justice, journalism and ethics. In its defense, one has to remember that South Korean democracy is still in its infancy – the last general only left office in 1993 – and its traditions run deeper than those of many other countries.

Unfortunately, those traditions are in danger of retarding the country’s development, particularly when it comes to the media and the image of the country. As Jinbong Choi describes in his 2007 book Media Culture and Korea:

“Examination of previous research suggests that the South Korean national image in the American news media is somewhat positive in some areas, such as food assistance to North Korea, active enterprise actions, political innovation, and traditional culture. However, the negative image of South Korea is stronger than these positive images, such as the dictatorial government, political offenses, demonstrations, corruption, Korean War, trouble between South and North Korea, labor-management disputes, and big accidents (such as the deconstruction of buildings and bridges). Negative images of South Korea were also reflected in American news media through representations of nationalism, hereditary rights of management, authorities and standardization.”

Instead of blaming foreigners like Breen for pointing out the negative side of South Korea, perhaps it’s time the Korean people allowed the Korean media to do it themselves.

But first, perhaps, they should ask the innovative chaps at Samsung to invent a sense of humor. ❶

William Bonds is a freelance journalist based in Tokyo.
　
　
THE KOREA TIMES’ GROVELING CLIMBDOWN

(Below is the text of a second apology printed in The Korea Times in response to criticism by Samsung over a column by British columnist Michael Breen.)

The Korea Times would like to issue a further correction with regard to the column headlined “What People Got for Christmas” by Michael Breen (Page 6, Dec. 25, 2009) and the related clarification (Page 1, Dec. 26, 2009).

The column indicated in its introduction that it was a factual roundup of stories in the news, and the columnist did not explain clearly at any point that it was intended to be humorous or satirical.

As such, we accept that Korean and overseas readers might be sufficiently misled to believe that the claims in the columns were based on fact.

However, The Korea Times has confirmed that the claims made in the column were entirely false and without foundation.

The Korea Times published these claims without proper fact-checking and its initial clarification failed to sufficiently explain that the column misled readers.

The Korea Times would like to sincerely apologize to both its Korean and overseas readers and those mentioned in the column.