"Are My Social Media Posts Next?" New Regulations on False Information Take Effect Today

The revised Information and Communications Network Act, aimed at addressing online false and manipulated information, went into effect today (July 7), marking the launch of new reporting and handling systems across major online platforms.

With growing concerns over the distribution of manipulated content, such as fake images and videos, fueled by the rise of generative AI and social media, platforms of a certain scale are now required to establish operational policies for managing false information. This includes setting up procedures for receiving and processing reports, notifying users, and disclosing transparency reports.

While the government explains that these measures are a minimal response to curb the monetization of verified illegal false information and reduce user harm, some critics worry about the potential for stifled expression or excessive content removal based on platform discretion.

In particular, as the line between false information and personal opinion or criticism can be ambiguous, there are concerns that reports could be abused or that platforms may apply inconsistent standards. Establishing transparent operational guidelines and effective appeal procedures will be key to the successful implementation of the system.

The issue of online false information has emerged as a new social challenge, as generative AI has made it easier to create fake images, videos, and manipulated content.

False information has caused social costs by spreading in various forms, including defamation, fraud, confusion during disasters, and false claims related to elections.

In particular, the recurring distribution of false information aimed at generating advertising and sponsorship revenue has consistently highlighted the need for institutional responses.

There have also been frequent criticisms that it is difficult for victims to identify the authors of such content or to receive compensation for damages.

In response, the National Assembly amended the Information and Communications Network Act in January to establish obligations for preventing the distribution of false and manipulated information and to create procedures for victim relief.

Internationally, there is a growing trend toward legislation that strengthens the responsibilities of large platforms, such as the Digital Services Act (DSA) in the European Union and the Network Enforcement Act (NetzDG) in Germany.

As the primary judgment and action regarding false and manipulated information are left to the platforms' operational policies, the social responsibility and content management roles of these platforms have become increasingly important.

The structure is designed so that the government does not directly determine the veracity of information; instead, platforms make judgments based on their own operational policies and the results of private fact-checking.

Large-scale platform operators with an average of 1 million or more daily users over the three months prior to the end of the previous year are required to establish operational policies for responding to false and manipulated information and to operate procedures for receiving and processing reports.

Given the scale of their user bases, platforms such as YouTube, Instagram, X, Facebook, and DC Inside are likely to be subject to these requirements.

Furthermore, when a report is filed, platforms must notify the user of the outcome and the reasons for their decision, and provide an appeal process.

They are also required to regularly publish transparency reports detailing their operational status.

The targets for fines are not the platform operators themselves, but rather content posters of a certain scale who profit from repeatedly distributing content that has been confirmed by a court to be illegal or false and manipulated.

The government explains that fines and punitive damages apply only to posters of a certain scale who earn advertising or sponsorship revenue, distinguishing them from general users.

The government added that simple expressions of opinion, criticism, or political arguments are not subject to regulation, and private messages, such as those on KakaoTalk, are also excluded.

However, a key point of contention in actual operation will be where to draw the line between false information and opinion or criticism.

Critics point out that because each platform has different operational policies and judgment criteria, similar posts could be subject to different actions.

Concerns have also been raised that if operators remove content excessively out of fear of legal risks, it could lead to controversies over the infringement of freedom of expression.

There is also the possibility that reports of false information could be misused as a tool for political or ideological conflict, or that issues such as so-called report bombing—where specific posts are targeted for mass reporting—could arise.

Ultimately, the success of the new system is seen to depend on how transparently platforms disclose their content handling criteria and how effectively they operate their user appeal procedures.

Whether platforms can stably handle the surge in reports while maintaining a balance between suppressing false information and guaranteeing freedom of expression will be the key to the system's successful settlement.


(Photo: Yonhap News)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.