Seoul: A revision to the Information and Communications Network Act, dubbed the fake information eradication bill, has sparked significant concern after passing the National Assembly's Science, ICT, Broadcasting, and Communications Committee on Wednesday. The bill, driven by the Democratic Party, proposes punitive damages up to five times the incurred harm for media outlets or online creators who intentionally spread illegal or fabricated information. While the initiative aims to bolster remedies for victims, it simultaneously poses a severe threat to press freedom, warranting a thorough reconsideration.

According to Yonhap News Agency, the bill's failure to exempt politicians, senior officials, and large corporations from seeking punitive damages is particularly troubling. Media organizations and civic groups have repeatedly warned that the legislation could empower those with substantial resources to file massive lawsuits against journalists and YouTubers, effectively stifling criticism. This raises concerns that the bill could serve as a protective shield for powerful entities rather than safeguarding the public, prompting fears of an increase in strategic lawsuits against public participation, or SLAPP suits.

Furthermore, the bill introduces a framework that implicitly presumes "malice" in cases of inaccurate reporting. Although earlier language about reversing the burden of proof was removed, the inclusion of various criteria allows for malice to be inferred when calculating damages. Media organizations are now tasked with demonstrating public-interest intent or good faith to avoid liability, shifting the burden of proving the absence of malice onto the press and the public. This contrasts with the United States, where public figures suing the media must prove "actual malice," and many states have anti-SLAPP laws to prevent intimidation suits.

The issue of double regulation for traditional media also stands out. Under the existing Act on Press Arbitration and Damage Remedies, news outlets must meet requirements for corrections, rebuttal reports, and civil liability. The new bill adds punitive damages under the network law, imposing heavier penalties on professional, regulated media compared to unregistered platforms like YouTube channels. Additionally, the bill's broad definition of "malicious fabricated information" and expanded administrative review powers threaten core press freedoms.

Freedom of expression is a fundamental liberty in any democracy, making it perplexing why a ruling party that advocates democratic values would advance legislation restricting this freedom without substantial public consultation or deliberation. Laws should protect the rights of the press and the people who hold power in check, not shield political power. The ruling party is urged to reconsider this bill in its entirety before it reaches the floor.