> The Republic of Korea (South Korea) is a liberal democracy that respects media freedom and pluralism. However, tradition and business interests often prevent journalists from fulfilling their role as watchdogs, and populist political tendencies stoke hatred of journalists.
When Hwang Woo-Suk was lying about cloning humans, his connections in the government allowed him to suppress the story by putting pressure on the network to cancel the second episode of "Producer's Note" that would have aired the rest of the allegations.
When the MV Sewol capsized a couple miles off the coast with 300 children actively drowning, the corporate control of the news channels allowed them to suppress the truth of the event, like how there was zero attempts at any rescue, and near zero survivors of passengers. Instead, the news spent a day reporting that all 300ish students had been rescued.
South Korea is controlled by just a few Chaebols and that includes its news media. The president during the MV Sewol incident for example was ousted at least partially due to the kinds of corruption and non-democratic influences that were uncovered after the sinking.
When most media is produced, financed, owned, operated etc by a couple hegemons with aligning goals, I don't care what economic system you operate under, you do not have "free" media.
Generally free + outlets like the NYTimes are based in Seoul.
Taiwan is more free than Korea but due its political predicament, it is not a candidate for the bureaus.
As for Japan, after a series of controversial bills were passed under Abe, their ranking dropped like a rock over the past decade and it is getting worse with so-called "press clubs" that are reluctant to criticise the govt due to how access is granted.
I wonder what the level of journalistic independences is in KR. What their public discourse is like. How truth, and opinions are tolerated.