President Kim Dae-ki, chief of staff, called the reports of President Yoon Seok-yeol in slanderous language “fake news” during his overseas trip. As the presidential office’s hard-line response continues, the confusion caused by this controversy is also showing signs of prolonging.
Kim Dae-gi, chief of staff at the presidential office in Yongsan, Seoul on the 29th, said, “Isn’t it necessary to fight ‘fake news’ a little bit regarding President Yoon’s slanderous reports? In the past, in developed countries, ‘fake news’ is despised and disliked, but we are a little tolerant, and as there have been many cases of mad cow disease and other incidents before, such fake news makes society sick.”
“In a situation where cooperation with the United States is urgently needed, the media fabricates and separates the alliance between the ROK and the United States, and the politicians are trying to cut the longevity in front of them, and I don’t think this is the case,” he said. I don’t think it’s good to look at it,” he said.
A reporter then asked if there were criticisms that if President Yoon had said something in the first place, the political strife in the National Assembly would not have intensified. After the remarks of President Yoon attending the Global Fund Financial Commitment Meeting in New York on the 22nd (Korea Standard) became known, the presidential office did not check the facts for more than 10 hours. After returning to South Korea, President Yoon said on the 26th that he had to find out the truth regarding him without stating what he was saying.
Chief of Staff Kim said, “We are in a very confused situation.” He said, “I asked the president, but it is difficult for me to remember well, and I did it in passing words.” He said, “Under the circumstances, there is no way ‘Biden’ will appear. Parliament’, and why ‘Biden’ appeared here, but it was unclear when I heard it later.”
He continued, “That’s what the seniors in the media said. When publishing an article that is unclear, the person who said it must go through the verification process, but I did not go through that. Open and close parentheses. We see that as the key.” “The front part (these XXs) seems to cause quite a bit of confusion even for the president. If you remove the noise and remove the noise, you will not hear the words once more.”
This led to the question of whether the media report might be defined as ‘fake news’, as the presidential office might not identify President Yoon’s remarks. Chief of Staff Kim said, “Even when it was said that the response in New York took 15 hours at first, I asked for voice analysis because it was really (the remark) and professional professors (commissioned). But it doesn’t seem to come out well until what he said.” He said, “I read some newspapers and said, ‘I don’t know even if I listened to it 100 times.’
When asked how far he thinks the truth should be investigated even though this controversy would be burdensome for the president’s office, Kim said, “Shouldn’t we also exit someday? MBC has not announced any positions at all, so it should take some time. We want to end it quickly.” When an additional question was asked, ‘Do you want an apology from a specific broadcasting company?’, Chief Secretary Kim replied, “As I said before, we think that ‘fake news’ should never happen once more.”
Earlier, on the 26th, the presidential office sent an official letter to MBC asking regarding the details of the report, and the power of the people, the ruling party, is putting pressure on MBC. On the same day, Lee Jong-bae, a member of the People’s Strength Seoul Councilor, filed a complaint with the police once morest MBC on charges of defamation and obstruction of business by spreading false information, and on the 28th, members of the People’s Strength National Assembly visited the MBC building in Sangam-dong, Mapo-gu, Seoul to protest. On the 29th, People’s Power filed a complaint with the Supreme Prosecutor’s Office once morest the MBC president, the head of the news department, the director of digital news, and a reporter for violating the Information and Communications Network Act and defamation under the Criminal Act.
On the same day, MBC said, “Even though there was a socially agreed procedure to find out the truth, such as filing a complaint with the Media Arbitration Committee, the power skipped all these things and went straight to the prosecution.” It is difficult to find any precedent for both the public broadcaster’s press officers and the president of the public broadcaster. Requesting the prosecution’s investigation of the public broadcaster’s president only with a vague assumption that he may have been involved in the report might be viewed as a reporting guideline that any media should not criticize any authority in the future,” he said.