President Lee Jae-myung has intensified his criticism of SBS's Unanswered Questions, and amid pushback from lawmakers led by the ruling party, the SBS chapter of the National Union of Mediaworkers (hereafter, the SBS chapter) has stood by its earlier statement, "Stop muzzling the press." Inside SBS, producers and the program's staff have remained silent and issued no additional statements; other media labor organizations have also not commented.
After the SBS chapter released a statement on the 20th titled "Monitoring power is not 'terror.' Stop muzzling the press," President Lee on the 22nd again criticized the program and the union, saying, "Rights come with duties, and freedom comes with responsibility. Press freedom does not mean the press has special privileges." Noh Jong-myeon, a Democratic Party lawmaker and former YTN reporter, and Kim Jong-bae, host of MBC Radio's Focus, also voiced positions that did not endorse the SBS chapter's statement.
[Related article: Why did political and media circles criticize the SBS union's claim that Lee is 'muzzling the press'?]
On the 23rd, an SBS chapter official told Media Today, "We fully agree with the president that anyone who distorts facts or spreads lies for political purposes must be held accountable. However, our concern is that the nation's highest leader went further: by declaring an unfavorable broadcast false and denouncing the program and its reporting as entirely staged, he crossed a line. That threatens democracy and undermines the press freedoms that sustain it."
In its earlier statement, the SBS chapter also criticized several actions as inappropriate: labeling Unanswered Questions as "terror," an "operation," or a "staged broadcast"; presenting the program's reporting as entirely false by relying on the ruling in lawyer Jang Young-ha's case even though the program's reporting does not fully align with Jang's claims; and singling out an individual producer while citing an inaccurate personnel-transfer history.
Following the union statement and the president's second round of criticism, silence has persisted inside SBS. The SBS Producers Association and the SBS Association of Nonfiction Producers — groups led by current-affairs and feature producers — have not issued formal positions. Those two groups reportedly discussed the matter on the 23rd. Management, which issued an apology on the 20th, has likewise offered no further comment. An SBS official told Media Today on the 24th, "We have no additional comment."
Company staff have remained quiet given the sensitivity of the issue. The production team of Unanswered Questions declined to respond to Media Today's inquiries. Some insiders say that the apology issued by SBS management and the apology broadcast by the news division attributed to the program's producers may not have been sufficiently coordinated with the production team at the time. The Association of Nonfiction Producers did not answer Media Today's related questions.
Many SBS employees interviewed by Media Today were cautious about taking a public stance. They said, "The president is treating the Jang Young-ha ruling and the program's reporting as if they are identical, but they are different." Others added, "We acknowledge the program was imperfect. However, we are critical of the president for launching intense criticism via social media despite having dropped the civil suit and not pursuing further legal action." Some recalled that when the contested episode aired, staff agreed that fact-checking was necessary, but many were disappointed with the program's execution.
Since the SBS chapter released its statement, other media professional organizations have not issued positions. A group of veteran journalists that formed the Emergency Meeting to Stop Media Oppression and Reform the Press (the Media Emergency Meeting) on the 24th issued a statement rejecting the SBS chapter's position and demanded an apology from President Lee, saying, "The Korea Journalists Association and the National Union of Mediaworkers cannot stand by." On the 24th, a National Union of Mediaworkers official told Media Today only that the matter is "under discussion."
