선거보도와 반론권

Abstract

The right to reply, one of the alternative dispute resolution systems for damages caused by the media, was first introduced into the Media Basic Law in 1980. Since then, it has been established as the right to reply under the Press Arbitration Act, as it and related laws undergo revisions. The right of reply is the right of rebuttal that allows the subject of news media to respond to the content of the news in their own words. The right to reply is a key right of media automated dialogue replacement (ADR) in that it is a solution through a procedure rather than a trial; its institutional characteristics are the effectiveness of damage relief and the speed of the relief process. In particular, the right to reply system is a case where the necessity of guaranteeing the right to reply demands promptness, and the guarantee of promptness is cycled to ensure the system’s effectiveness. Considering the social impact of news media before and after an election period, effectively guaranteeing the right to reply to the content reported during the election period is critical. The legislative acknowledgment of the right to reply to election news was a legislative measure that enhanced fairness in response to revitalizing election campaign methods using the media. The design of the right to reply system under the Public Official Election Act must be specified and evaluated differently from the contents of the Press Arbitration Act. One item introduced in the Public Official Election Act as a postmortem correction system for election news reflecting the peculiarities of the election reality was the right to reply. This study suggests that revisions are essential to institutionalize the right to reply immediately and promptly to election news. Revisions must properly realize the meaning and function of the right to reply system under the Public Official Election Act.