Comments on the YouTube Korea Instance

In our previous two blogs, we have talked about the real name verification issue between YouTube and South Korea government. In South Korea, this particular issue suggested a controversial discussion among the Internet users. We want to discuss the reactions of Korean Internet users on this issue more in depth.
( In South Korea, Real-Name Verification Regulation was first passed in January 26, 2007. The law requires "Real-Name Verification" for Internet services with more than 100,000 different daily users )

As the police announced that the reason for the recent instances of celebrities’ suicides were caused by the Internet users’ malicious comments, the government strictly implemented and expanded Real-Name System Regulations on all Korean Websites. And, this YouTube Korea instance triggered strong oppositions among Internet users against government’s harsh limitation against freedom of expression on the Internet. The main issue discussed on the web is: Internet-Real Name System, Is it really necessary?

We think that the more important issue raised here is: how are these instances changing how Korean people think and act? When Unee ( a Korean singer who committed suicide by Internet users’ malicious comments ) first commented suicide, the entire country was shocked. As more instances hit the country, people are starting to recognize the seriousness of the issue. South Korea is one of the countries that has fast-growing IT. Since 1990s, when Internet users significantly increased in South Korea, the country concentrated on developing and improving their IT systems. However, they did not concentrate on developing the quality of the web environment. As more information became available to the users, they collaborated and shared their information and comments on the web across the country. And, the power of Korean “netizens” significantly increased over the decades, and cyber bullying became a serious problem. Before they protest against Real-Name Verification Regulation, they have to think about what caused this to happen. South Korea is the first country to implement the real-name regulation. We think the instances introduced in our previous postings are starting to change people’s perspectives. These shocking news are suggesting everyone in the nation that something needs to change in the web environment.

Now, it is time for South Koreans to think about improving the quality of the web environment—not the quality of the systems.

On April 10, Google refuses South Korean government’s real-name system!

In our previous blog post, we mentioned how YouTube agreed to implement Real Name system on YouTube Korea, because the South Korean government required YouTube to use the "real-name verification" system in its attempt to reduce piracy. However, a week after, YouTube refused South Korean government’s real-name system. Rachel Whetstone, vice president of Global Communications & Public Affairs at Google, strongly argued that: “Freedom of Expression on the Internet should be experienced globally by all users!” For now, YouTube limited its video upload and comment functions in South Korea. However, they offered a pop-up statement on YouTube Korea website that, “If you change your country setting, you can upload videos and post comments.” YouTube indirectly suggests Korean users an alternative choice to use YouTube without having to go through real-name verification.

This particular issue raises the question of whether or not it is morally correct to inform Internet users of the way in which they can get around using the newly implemented "real-name verification" system for the South Korean YouTube users. This case shows how much YouTube values “Freedom of Expression” of the Internet users. YouTube is a highly user dependent website, where all resources available in the website is created by the users. I personally agree with YouTube’s decision to refuse the real-name system. I feel embarrassed (as a Korean citizen) that this is the first time YouTube had to go through a real-name verification issue on their service. Even though they eventually refused Korean government’s regulation, this case clearly shows how serious privacy issue is in South Korea.

Many Korean Internet users supported YouTube’s decision to keep their company’s value. The Internet privacy related instances we have shared in our previous blogs have shocked the entire country several times. Many South Koreans are starting to recognize the seriousness of the privacy issues in the country. South Korea is about to take a first step towards envisioning a healthy web-environment.

On April 1, YouTube Korea Begins "Real-Name" System

Starting from April 1, Google agreed to implement a “real name” system on Youtube Korea. Google submitted to the new Korean Government policy on the “real name” system regulations. South Korea is the only country in the world where Internet users are required to confirm their identity before posting many comments or contents. All South Korean Google Product users can post their comments and videos only after they confirm their resident registration numbers.

This is the first time Google implemented a “real name” system on their service. Google allowed all users around the world to use Google services with only an online ID, password and email address. Many Korea Youtube users got angry about the Government decision to force the “real name” system on Youtube, because Youtube is a highly user-oriented website. Google first refused this decision, because they value users’ participation on their services. However, cyber bullying has become a serious issue in South Korea, and the Government strongly asserted that they cannot make an exception.

The decision shows how serious the privacy and cyber bullying issues are in South Korea. Why is South Korea suffering from these issues? Hiding behind the computer screens, the users become more violent and malicious with their comments. Because they know that they are not going to get punished for what they say or do, they freely express their feelings. More important issue is the group polarization. As a large group, Internet users believe that their responsibilities on their comments are diffused. In a group, people feel less guilty about doing something bad. Sometimes people show totally different personalities on the Web. And, they are using Internet as a refuge to relieve their stress. As more Internet users act “artificially” on the Web, the Internet will remain as an imaginary space. We should carefully think about how we want to use our space.

Simply Deleting Comments Won't Solve the Problem!

The Ministry of Justice recently announced that portal websites have rights to delete people’s comments if necessary. Until now, websites only deleted postings or comments that are reported by a specific victim. However, from now on, websites can delete “any comment” that they think is wrong.

We believe the government’s restriction on the web is becoming way too extreme in this particular case. People should have right to freely express their thoughts and opinions. And, it should not be hindered (or deleted) by other people. Also, how do they identify between malicious comments and regular comments?

We think that in order for this regulation to be implemented, websites need to come up with very specific guidelines about which comments need to be deleted. Also, companies should significantly increase the number of employees who will be monitoring the comments. Unless the “deleting policy” is carefully managed, the websites will have to deal with a serious privacy issue with the users. Also, it may significantly harm reputations of the websites. To create a healthy web environment, companies have to assist the users to recognize what is right or wrong—instead of just deleting their comments without letting them know. Nowadays, most websites are created and ran by collaborated work of Internet users. Restricting their thoughts and comments cannot solve the problem. Instead, the government and IT company leaders have to find ways to inform and encourage users to correctly participate in the web spaces.

Online Suicide Cafés… Who Should be Held Responsible?

In one of our first posts, we talked about the rise in the number of suicides of celebrities due to malicious comments of netizens. However, this isn’t the sole driving force of the recent rise in suicide rates. There has been a disturbing increase in the number of people committing accompanied-suicide in South Korea, where random individuals gather together at a specific location and “die together”. A close investigation has shown that such incidents were heavily influenced by the establishments of online suicide cafés. These suicide cafés were created with the sole purpose of gathering people who are thinking of potentially committing suicides and sharing information regarding how to commit such atrocious acts. Sensing the extreme severity of the rising number of such deaths in the recent months, the Korean government has finally taken an initiative in arresting the founders and administrators of these suicide Internet cafés.

Whereas online communities were once formed with providing a space in the cyberworld where individuals can anonymously share his or her ideas and perceptions regarding various topics and issues in mind, not all, but significant number of such web-based communities nowadays, have undoubtedly deteriorated from their good-willed nature. Here, we can see how the society is changing, if not shaping, the way in which technology is being used by its users. As a fervent user of the Internet as well as a member of numerous online communities, It is distressing to hear such depressing news. We regret seeing how online communities, which were once created to encourage people with similar interests to actively engage in conversations and activities in order be fully invigorated to pursue an even more fabulous lives, are being misused in such a manner.

We believe that the South Korean government’s first step forward in taking care of the rapidly spreading deterioration and misuse of these “Internet cafés” will greatly facilitate decreasing the number of innocent lives taken away by this “silent power” of technology. We cannot deny the fact that we are fully responsible for changes in technology that may occur, whether it be a change for the better or for the worse.

It’s time for us to be more aware of our doings in order to prevent such atrocities from happening and start fixing even the smallest problems we notice, or else, it will be too late for us to do anything.

We Are Watching You, Big Brother!

Our previous blog postings have discussed privacy issues in South Korea caused by the rapid development of technology in the country. So far, we have discussed issues concerning Real-Time Locating Service, highway CCTVs, and cellphone GPS services. As we can see, the growth of surveillance has become a significant problem also in the Korean information-oriented society. I want to relate these issues to the topic that we discussed in class about “panoptic power.”

In the novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell, Big Brother takes a total control over the society and constantly “watch” everyone through telescreens. In the past, when the novel was first introduced, this totalitarian dictatorship seemed unreal; however, in the present society, we can easily find cases of complete surveillance around us. For examples, our personal information, actions, and thoughts are publicly or visually available through electronic devices, such as the Internet, CCTV’s, and cell phones. In the current society, technology is Big Brother. And, it is hard to “opt-out” of Big Brother’s total surveillance. The phrase, “Big Brother is watching you,” sounds very creepy and alarming to many of us.

How can we protect our rights against the increasing panoptic power of technology? Before Big Brother completely takes away our privacy, we have to lead the “reverse panopticon” to protect our rights and privacy. As technology develops, individuals’ knowledge and realization of the related issues also have increased. As we adapt to the information-oriented society, I believe that we have become capable of protecting ourselves from Big Brother. As the users of technology increase, the more people are becoming familiar and skilled with utilizing and manipulating technology. Recently, people have become more aware and attentive of the possible threats that the current ease may bring about in the near future.

In order to make sure that we don’t lose the control of our privacy, we have to “watch out” on Big Brother.

Highway CCTV Cameras and Their Impact on Privacy

More than ever before, we find ourselves under a constant surveillance of CCTV cameras. According to a Wikipedia entry, CCTV stands for “closed-circuit television,” which is the use of video cameras to transmit a signal to a specific place, on a limited set of monitors. CCTV cameras are being used in various locations, ranging widely from private apartment areas to public highways. This entry will focus on the issue of the currently installed CCTV cameras on the highways in South Korea, which are used in detecting cars that drive way past the speed limit in order to charge fines to those speed-drivers. On major Korean highways, you can see cars whiz by and come to a sudden slow-down in speed when right under a camera in order to avoid getting caught by those speed detectors. Once your car gets caught on video, within three weeks, you will receive a letter in your mail stating how much you are being charged for your speeding ticket—the fee varies, depending on how much more you drove above the speed limit—with a picture—the front view of your car, car license plate, the driver and the front passenger—attached to the letter.

Although the highway CCTVs were initially implemented with the good-natured intentions of reducing the number of accidents and deaths that take place on highways, we cannot deny the inevitable truth that these CCTVs have started to trespass into our privacies. For example, the fact that the front passenger was once made visible in the speeding ticket letter—not anymore, thanks to the South Korean government‘s realization of the issue’s seriousness—demonstrates and poses a question as to how much further, to what extent, technology will continue to monitor our lives.

We believe that although such measures of erasing the front passenger's face have significantly improved the conditions of people's privacy, there still is room for more improvement. Since only the face of the front passenger is erased from the picture, there still is the possibility of knowing whether the passenger is a male or female. It is good to see that the Korean government has been proactive on this issue, but more improvements can be made to lessen the degree to which such CCTV systems pry into our lives. We hope to see a future where technology is used in a helpful way while embracing our privacy. If no further preventative measures are taken, things may start to look REALLY ugly, first with a soaring increase in divorce rates and unhappy families!

It is in a way scary to know we’re being watched almost EVERYWHERE we go, except that we don’t exactly know WHEN. It reminds us of the recent discussion of the panoptic tower from class...!