[Editorial] Reshaping election culture

The forthcoming April general election is important not just because it is a precursor to the December presidential poll. It is important more because it offers a rare chance to reshape the nation’s election culture.

The April 11 election is the first major election in Korea where candidates and their supporters are allowed to fully utilize the Internet for electioneering ― unless they poison the election atmosphere by attempting to defame their rivals.

Previously, the Internet could not be used for electioneering for 180 days before voting. Last month, however, the Constitutional Court ruled this restriction unconstitutional. It said that since campaigning in cyberspace is virtually costless it serves the purpose of the election law, which is intended to level the playing field between rich and poor candidates.

Following the court’s verdict, the National Election Commission announced on Jan. 13 that it would allow online campaigning round the year. Under the new guideline, candidates and their supporters can stage campaign activities using Internet portal sites, blogs, emails, mobile messengers and social networking sites without time restriction.

However the new rule still bans campaign activities that involve costs, such as placing ads on Internet portals, before the official campaign period, which covers the 13 days immediately before election day.

The commission’s decision sent political parties scrambling for ways to harness online campaign tools, especially social networking services whose formidable power had been well demonstrated during the Seoul mayoral by-elections in October.

The ruling Grand National Party is particularly desperate for ideas to boost its SNS usage. Caught in the throes of reinventing itself, the party is worried that its low SNS utilization might further darken its already poor election prospects. To narrow the SNS gap with rival parties, the GNP plans to use a lawmaker-aspirant’s usage of Twitter and other social networking tools as a criterion for nomination.

If properly used, networking services could help reform the nation’s election culture. In the past, candidates relied on their campaign machines for electioneering. This outdated approach is expensive as it takes a lot of money to build a machine and keep it well-oiled.

If SNS gains importance as a campaign tool, candidates’ reliance on old-fashioned campaign machines will decrease, which will make election campaigning less expensive and more transparent.

Furthermore, SNS helps candidates engage voters and find out their views on critical issues. These days, many young SNS users want to interact with politicians and political parties. By delivering what they want, candidates can encourage these people to participate in the political process. As a result, election processes could reflect the opinions of the electorate more accurately.

But social media are not without their negative sides. More than anything else, networking services could become a hotbed of negative campaigning, since they propagate information instantly and without any filtering. Twitter, for instance, allows users to “retweet” or repeat others’ messages to their own followers, thus spreading information, true or false, at lightning speed.

The viral nature of SNS could tempt people to engage in smear tactics. Even though the smears are not true, they can be effective because the target’s reputation is tarnished before the truth is known. As a result, voters could be inundated with slanderous rumors that have not been vetted.

The temptation to use dirty tricks would reach its culmination on election day as it would be almost impossible to verify damaging allegations against a certain candidate. Previously, campaigns were banned on the day of an election. But the election watchdog has now allowed campaigns until the last minutes of voting on election day.

As concerns about the adverse side effects of SNS mount, prosecutors have come up with a guideline on the use of networking sites for electioneering. They said they would pursue indictments for those who publish false information in order to thwart a candidate getting elected. Prosecutors will also seek arrests for those who post a false message on the Internet 30 times or more, or send 500 or more text messages containing a falsehood.

But it is questionable whether these measures could prevent networking sites from being wrought with malicious propaganda.

The primary responsibility for reshaping the nation’s election culture lies with voters. Each voter needs to assess negative messages carefully. SNS users, for their part, should refrain from propagating groundless rumors about candidates and their parties.