Behind the symbols of old media—piled like a funeral altar with old newspapers and extinguished TVs—the silhouettes of citizens' protest signs loom. This visualizes the street cry of "rigged election, re-election" becoming a funeral dirge for the downfall of old media. [Photo=Hanmi Ilbo Graphics]The press is not an institution that reigns over readers and viewers. It is an institution that provides facts and issues so that the public can watch, listen, and judge.

However, at some point, some media outlets began to try to teach instead of represent their readers and viewers. They interpreted public anger, evaluated voters' choices, and packaged their own conclusions under the names of "common sense" and "rationality."

The Old Media Trap JTBC Showed Us

JTBC was the first to walk that path. Explaining JTBC's crisis solely through its recently revealed financial difficulties or debt problems misses the core issue. The crisis revealed in numbers is merely the final outcome.

The deeper cause is the collapse of trust with viewers. At its root were overconfidence and arrogance, and the illusion of old media that ignored the changes in the media environment.

In the past, when broadcasters set the agenda, viewers followed. When newspapers set the direction with editorials, readers understood the world within that framework. But now it's different. YouTube, SNS, alternative media, and citizen networks have dismantled the monopolistic interpretive power of traditional media.

Readers and viewers are no longer passive consumers. They have become subjects who seek, compare, verify, and judge for themselves.

Yet, old media remains trapped in the grammar of the past. They believe the public will follow if they choose the agenda and create the frame. That very overconfidence is arrogance.

Viewers changed, but broadcasters did not. The market fragmented, but broadcasters mistakenly believed that a centrally controlled public opinion structure was still in operation. Financial issues are merely lagging indicators revealed too late.

Han Dong-hoon is a Conduit, Not a Cause

JTBC is just the beginning. Chosun Ilbo and TV Chosun also stand before the same trap. Old mastheads, high recognition, and familiar channel numbers are no longer a shield.

Conservative readers and viewers have already changed. They do not judge based solely on print and screen. They watch field footage, look up legal documents, and verify information with each other through YouTube and SNS.

Despite this, Chosun Ilbo and TV Chosun still seem to believe they are the gatekeepers of conservative public opinion. They seem to think they can set the direction for conservatives, choose the faces of conservatism, and show the path that conservative voters should follow.

The representative conduit for this is Han Dong-hoon.

There is no need to view the relationship between Han Dong-hoon, Chosun Ilbo, and TV Chosun as a private one. There is also no reason to speak of private collusion that has not been publicly confirmed.

The core is political function. Han Dong-hoon has become a benchmark used by some conservative media to scrutinize the internal affairs of conservative parties.

In contrast to the old and rough conservatism of the Jang Dong-hyuk regime and street conservative voters, Han Dong-hoon represents conservatism based on rationality and common sense. This very framework is a lecture to readers and viewers.

However, the questions conservative readers and viewers are asking now are not about Han Dong-hoon's rejoining the party.

Was the election fair? Were voting rights guaranteed? Did the election commission take responsibility? Why are special prosecutor and parliamentary investigations necessary? Why did the demand for a re-election erupt on the streets?

Ignoring these questions and trying to position a specific politician as a symbol of "rational conservatism" is an evasion of the core issue.

Why Can't They Say "Rigged Election"?

The bigger problem is the attitude of old media, which used to dismiss talk of rigged elections as far-right conspiracy theories.

What swept over them like a gale was the incident of disenfranchisement in the June 3rd local elections. There were insufficient ballots, voters could not cast their votes, and voting was halted at some polling stations. The exercise of voting rights, the starting point of an election, was blocked due to the failure of state institutions to manage it.

If they cannot call this a rigged election, what can be called a rigged election?

The term "rigged election" is not only used for manipulating the vote counts of specific candidates. If an election was managed unfairly or unjustly, it is also a rigged election.

When voters are unable to vote, it is not a simple administrative error. It is an event where the freedom, fairness, and equality of elections have been violated. It is an event where the right to participate in politics, which the state must guarantee, has been revoked.

As the true nature of the election commission has been revealed, they are flustered. Previously, they dismissed inquiries about flaws and suspicions in election management as conspiracy theories. They labeled citizens who questioned the issues in early voting and vote counting procedures as far-right. They uncritically accepted the election commission's explanations and reported them as de facto conclusions when the commission denied them.

This was not oversight. It was akin to acting as a megaphone, amplifying the election commission's statements.

The responsibility does not lie solely with the lawmakers who have acted as a shield without properly questioning the election commission's accountability. If the National Assembly, which should be checking the election commission, remained silent or collaborated, the media, which should be monitoring the election commission, also bears significant responsibility.

Especially the silence or ambiguous stance of Chosun Ilbo and TV Chosun on the election commission's issues is a case of ignoring what citizens are shouting on the streets.

The reason they cannot say "rigged election" is clear. The moment they do, they would be admitting the validity of the citizens' concerns, which they had previously dismissed as conspiracy theories.

Furthermore, their reporting attitude, which has essentially acted as a spokesperson for the election commission without sufficient verification of its explanations, is also bound to be scrutinized. Therefore, they cannot say it. This is the essence of their flustered state.

The Judgment Has Already Begun

The citizens on the streets have already given their answer: "Rigged election, re-election."

This slogan is not a simple political slogan. It is a question that old media has ignored, a responsibility that the election commission has tried to cover up, and a conclusion that the political establishment has tried to avoid.

At the same time, this slogan is becoming the funeral dirge for old media.

When the media does not monitor power but becomes its megaphone, it loses trust. When it tries to teach readers and viewers instead of representing them, it is judged in the market. No matter how old the masthead, it becomes an empty shell if readers and viewers leave.

The future of conservatism is not decided in the editorial department of Chosun Ilbo. It is not appointed in the studios of TV Chosun. Nor is it determined by whether Han Dong-hoon rejoins the party.

The future of conservatism lies in the hands of voters demanding fairness in voting rights, citizens questioning the legitimacy of elections, and the people shouting for a re-election on the streets.

JTBC is just the beginning.

Media that turns its back on readers and viewers will perish. Media that ignores changes in the media environment will also perish. Media that still believes it can shape public opinion, move readers, and teach viewers will perish even faster.

"Rigged election, re-election" was a slogan that old media once mocked. But now, that slogan is becoming the funeral dirge for media that have turned their backs on readers and viewers.

The media makes the choice, but the readers and viewers render the judgment. And that judgment has already begun.