[Noh Dong-il Column] Freedom of Expression Needs Breathing Room

ABC News: $15 million. CBS Broadcasting Inc. (CBS) parent company Paramount: $16 million. NBC News: $16 million. These are the settlement amounts Donald Trump, President of the United States, has secured from lawsuits against media outlets. The reasons include coverage unfavorable to him during the 2024 presidential campaign or claims that his reputation was damaged by inaccurate reporting in a sexual assault lawsuit filed against him by a woman in the past.
In the United States, it is extremely difficult for public officials, including the president, to win defamation lawsuits against the press. This is because it is hard to meet the 'actual malice' standard—proving that the article was false and that the publisher knew it was false. Freedom of the press, including reporting and commentary, is at the core of the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of expression, often called the secular Bible in America.
Nevertheless, it is considered unusual for major media companies to capitulate by agreeing to settlements. Donald Trump’s claims for damages often reach as much as $20 billion. The sheer size of these claims is intimidating. Trump currently wields unchecked power, controlling both houses of Congress. For media executives, not only are the costs high, but fighting a protracted legal battle against such a powerful figure may seem unwise. CBS agreed to settle at a time when its parent company, Paramount, was awaiting approval for a major merger and acquisition.
Donald Trump’s lawsuits seeking $15 billion from The New York Times (NYT) and $10 billion from The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) are still ongoing. Trump claims his reputation was damaged by 'false reporting' regarding allegations of 'obscene letters' he allegedly sent to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Edward Epstein. Both NYT and WSJ have stated they 'will not succumb to pressure' and 'will vigorously defend' themselves, but how long they can hold out remains uncertain.
"The media must stop surrendering to the Trump administration. The First Amendment and democracy are being undermined." This criticism comes from Anna M. Gomez, a commissioner at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). However, the reality is that American media are increasingly self-censoring and refraining from criticizing Trump and the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement, leading to a contraction of press freedom and democracy.
On Christmas Eve, December 24, the National Assembly passed an amendment to the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection. As its nickname, the 'False and Manipulated Information Eradication Act,' suggests, its aim is to prohibit the distribution of false or manipulated information. The amendment’s main provisions ban the distribution of such information intended to harm others or gain unfair advantage by infringing on personal rights, property rights, or the public interest. If damages from the spread of false or manipulated information are recognized, courts can estimate damages up to 50 million won and order compensation up to five times the recognized amount.
Criticism of the bill promoted by the Democratic Party of Korea (DPK) has mainly come from the opposition and conservatives. Unusually, this bill has drawn criticism across the political spectrum. Issues include the use of subjective intent and abstract concepts to determine what constitutes false or manipulated information, the regulation of cases where only part of the information is false, and the risk of a surge in SLAPP suits under the guise of combating false information. The law also opens the door for the state to broadly intervene in individuals’ freedom of expression. In fact, current laws already allow for regulation of false or manipulated information. In Korea, both civil and criminal liability can be imposed for defamation, whether based on facts or falsehoods. Few countries impose criminal penalties for defamation based on factual statements. It is difficult to understand the rationale for pushing through the amendment despite criticism that it constitutes excessive regulation.
President Lee Jae-myung is perhaps the greatest beneficiary of constitutionally protected freedom of expression. 'For freedom of expression to function properly, it needs the breathing room necessary for its survival.' This was the reasoning given by the Supreme Court of Korea in 2020 when it acquitted then-Gyeonggi Governor Lee Jae-myung of charges of spreading false information. The appellate court that acquitted President Lee of election law violations this March also cited this precedent.
This is precisely why conservatives and progressives alike are urging President Lee to exercise his veto against the amendment to the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection. Cheong Wa Dae (the Blue House) has stated it respects the National Assembly’s decision, but there is still time. As the year draws to a close, it is hoped that President Lee will carefully consider whether to promulgate the law. The breathing room for freedom of expression is, in essence, the breathing room for democracy itself.
dinoh7869@fnnews.com Reporter