[Public Opinion Briefing Vol. 28-2] Three Major Issues Regarding Freedom of the Press

[Public Opinion Briefing Vol. 28] "An Analysis of International Perceptions on Freedom of the Press by Issue"

[Topic 1] Global Perceptions of Freedom of the Press

[Topic 2] Analysis of Perceptions on Three Major Issues Regarding Freedom of the Press

[Topic 3] South Korean Perceptions of Freedom of the Press

Topic 2. Analysis of Perceptions on Three Major Issues Regarding Freedom of the Press

StartFragment

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

Issue 1. Permitting Sedition-Inciting Publications (Publications from Hostile Nations): 79% Permit vs. 14% Do Not Permit

Examining global perceptions of issues debated in relation to freedom of the press, it is evident that the principle of freedom of the press should be protected under all circumstances, although the intensity of this perception varies by issue. Firstly, a significant 79% of all respondents believe that the right to read sedition-inciting publications (publications from hostile nations) should be guaranteed. Even in China, where censorship of publications still exists, 78% of respondents answered that it should be permitted. Only among Indian citizens, who are relatively lukewarm on freedom of the press, was the acceptance rate lower at 56%.

However, even in South Korea, where the National Security Act remains a contentious issue, 73% of respondents supported free access to publications from North Korea, considered a hostile nation, while 26% opposed it. This result is a stark contrast to the past, when possessing or even casually reading North Korean books could lead to severe punishment during the authoritarian regime and the early stages of democratic government. In the past authoritarian era, there was little resistance to prioritizing the realization of values such as 'anti-communism,' 'anti-North Korea,' and 'security' over human rights. This result suggests a significant shift in public perception, with the majority now prioritizing the realization of democratic values such as freedom of thought, speech, and publication.

[Figure 1] Permitting Sedition-Inciting Publications (Publications from Hostile Nations): "Should Permit" (%)

Note 1. Percentage of respondents choosing option 1: 1. Should permit 2. Should not permit.

Note 2. Not surveyed in Argentina, Jordan, Peru.

Issue 2. Unlimited Internet Access vs. Government Control: 60% Unlimited Access vs. 32% Government Control

Meanwhile, regarding the issue of government control over the internet, which has recently become a global debate, there is a strong global voice opposing such control. Although not as high as the 79% who supported the circulation of publications from hostile nations, a significant 60% of respondents opposed government control over the internet, regardless of the content's harmfulness.

Furthermore, the response patterns regarding internet access differ from those observed in previous country-specific analyses of freedom of the press issues. Notably, countries in the Commonwealth of Independent States, which were previously lukewarm on freedom of the press issues, showed strong opposition to government internet control. 79% of Azerbaijani citizens clearly stated their opposition to government internet control, while citizens of Ukraine and Russia also responded that unlimited internet access is necessary, at 64% and 57% respectively. Even in China, where government internet control practices persist, 71% of respondents opposed government control. Conversely, it is noteworthy that in France, known for its progressive stance on freedom of the press and thought, only 52% opposed internet control.

[Figure 2] Stance on Government Internet Access Control: Opposition (%)

Note 1. Percentage of respondents choosing option 2: 1. All citizens should be able to access all internet content without restriction. 2. The government can block citizens' access to some internet content.

Note 2. Not surveyed in Argentina, Peru, Poland.

Issue 3. Freedom of the Press vs. Political Stability: 56% Freedom of the Press First vs. 36% Media Control for Political Stability Possible

It is no exaggeration to say that most policies that have restricted freedom of the press have relied on the justification of political stability. The results of this survey indicate that global citizens answer 'no' to the question of whether freedom of the press can be restricted for the sake of political stability. 56% of respondents agreed with the statement that "the press should be able to disseminate news and ideas freely without government control under any circumstances." Conversely, only 37% agreed with the statement that the government can control media reporting in the event of political instability.



Among the respondents, 71% of Americans, 70% of French citizens, and 69% of British citizens, who generally showed strong support for issues related to freedom of the press, expressed a high level of opposition to government media control, regardless of the political situation. South Korean citizens also stood at 72%, similar to Americans, in their position that the media should be able to disseminate information freely without government control.

However, looking at other countries, a relatively high proportion of respondents in Islamic countries such as Jordan, Indonesia, and Iran, as well as former Soviet bloc countries like Russia and Azerbaijan, indicated that government control of media reporting is possible in cases of political instability. Generally, in countries with frequent political unrest, the perception that freedom of the press can be sacrificed for political stability is high.

Chinese citizens also supported the idea that the government can control media reporting for political stability, with 42% agreeing, which is higher than the global average of 36%. 53% held the view that the government should not control media reporting under any circumstances. While Chinese citizens expressed a relatively high level of agreement and perceived necessity for freedom of the press, these results indicate underlying concerns that the expansion of such human rights values could deepen political instability in China or ultimately shock the Chinese political system.

[Figure 3] Stance on Government Media Control for Political Stability: Opposition (%)

Note 1. Percentage of respondents choosing option 1: 1. The press should be able to disseminate news and ideas without government control. 2. The government can block media reporting if it causes political instability.

2. Survey not conducted in Argentina.