▲ Kim Min-ho, chair of the Special Committee for Deliberation on Fake and Fabricated Information, speaks during a press conference held near Gwanghwamun in Seoul on the 2nd.
The Korea Internet Self-Governance Organization (KISO), an internet self-regulatory body, has disclosed its review status for fake and fabricated information for the first time since the implementation of the amended Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. (Information and Communications Network Act).
Out of a total of 27 cases reviewed, not a single case was determined to be fake or fabricated information resulting in a deletion order.
The KISO Special Committee for Deliberation on Fake and Fabricated Information held a press conference near Gwanghwamun in Seoul today (the 2nd) and revealed the review results for the 27 reports of fake and fabricated information requested by member companies.
This marks the first time KISO has disclosed how its self-regulatory criteria for fake and fabricated information have been applied in actual reviews following the enforcement of the revised Information and Communications Network Act on July 7.
The amended Information and Communications Network Act expands the scope of "illegal information" banned from distribution on communication networks and prohibits the distribution of "fake and fabricated information" that infringes upon the personality or property rights of others while knowing the information to be false or manipulated.
Among the 27 received cases, KISO completed final reviews for 23 cases, excluding four cases that were either deleted during the review process or subjected to temporary measures due to rights infringements involving defamation.
None of the cases were judged to be fake or fabricated information under the "KISO Guidelines for Self-Regulation of Fake and Fabricated Information," with all 23 concluding as "not applicable."
Looking at the types of posted content submitted, "information, review, and promotional" posts related to products, services, user reviews, or promotions accounted for 19 cases, making up 70% of the total.
Most of these were daily-life-oriented posts, such as information on travel agencies and accommodations, restaurant receipt reviews, beauty procedure reviews, and product discount information.
In addition, a few dispute-related, slanderous, and entertainment-focused posts were submitted, along with a small number of posts dealing with claims or opinions in academic and religious domains.
The committee first reviewed whether the posts corresponded to false or manipulated information based on the reported content and supporting evidence, and if falsity or manipulation was not recognized, it skipped subsequent requirement evaluations and immediately ruled them "not applicable."
The committee explained that instead of mechanically checking only whether certain details matched facts, it simultaneously examined core messages and the practical impact on users' perception of facts.
Even if there were minor errors in details, somewhat inaccurate expressions, a lack of information timeliness, or the possibility of accidental posting, falsity or manipulation was not recognized if the overall context did not make the information appear false or fabricated.
On the other hand, in cases where falsity or manipulation was recognized, the committee additionally considered whether there was an intent to cause damage or acquire unfair profits, and whether the rights of others or the public interest were infringed upon, while comprehensively evaluating factors such as posting recurrence, distribution methods, and participation in the public sphere.
The committee also excluded subjective evaluations, opinions, and academic, scientific, or religious controversial issues where objective truth has not been established from the scope of judgment.
This is because the committee's deliberation is not a process to certify the truthfulness of information, but a process to screen whether content falls under targets whose distribution should be restricted as "fake and fabricated information" according to guideline requirements, the committee added.
For posts related to individual rights infringements such as defamation and privacy violations, the committee guided users on the existing temporary measures system, and refrained from making judgments on the merits of whether content constituted fake or fabricated information for cases where temporary measures were taken during the review process.
Kim Min-ho, chair of the Special Committee for Deliberation on Fake and Fabricated Information, added, "Moving forward, under the principle of maximizing freedom of expression and the right to know while minimizing damage caused by fake and fabricated information, we plan to accumulate deliberation cases and transparently disclose the results to enhance the predictability and reliability of self-regulation."
(Photo: Yonhap News)
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.