The purpose of this paper is to explore frame forms and types in conservative presses and progressive presses by analyzing the reported articles of cyber smears. In Korean presses, their voices are generally categorized in the spectrum between the conservative and the progressive. In particular, the issue of cyber smears has encouraged readers in general to support as well as to criticize the voices by the frame forms and types of the presses. Each frame in presses, conservative or progressive, furthermore, tends to be reproduced and re-established in the connection with other social issues.
In the voices of the conservative like The Chosun Ilbo and The Dong-A Ilbo, for examples, it is reported that Korean government should intervene any inhumane expressions or activities in cyber spaces to protect the value of human dignity. In those of the progressive like The Hankyoreh and Kyunghyang Shinmun, however, any actions by Korean governments is against the freedom of individuals, the value of the freedom of expression.
By analyzing the articles of cyber smears in the four media, I make attempt to solve four problems in this paper as follows:
1. what kind of the conception of freedom(liberty) is differently in the spectrum of the conservative and the progressive press?
2. what is the frame of each press in reporting cyber smears?
3. what is different in each frame?
4. what is its social implication?
In conclusion, the questions above are to be answered in coding the articles in the four presses and categorizing them in four frame models: situation, responsibility attribution, background, and value.
Firstly, the frame of the conservative in The Chosun Ilbo and The Dong-A Ilbo have the positive conception of freedom. This frame has justified the intervention of the government to individual expressions in cyber spaces in the name of protection of personality based on human dignity as rational beings. In The Hankyoreh and Kyunghyang Shinmun, however, any freedom of expression in cyber space must be respected if it does not harm to others. This means that the frame of the progressive has the negative conception of freedom.
Secondly, the articles of cyber smears in The Chosun Ilbo and The Dong-A Ilbo have been produced in two frame models: ‘situation’ and ‘responsibility attribution’. They has emphasized the features of social conflicts related to individual stories in ordinary lives. For the same issue in The Hankyoreh and Kyunghyang Shinmun, however, the most important is the frame model of ‘value’ in that the articles have pursued the values and rights of privacy, free expression in individuals, democracy, etc.
Thirdly, the conservative frame based on the ‘situation’ model and the ‘responsibility attribution’ model has supported any intervention of the Korean government to protect human dignity in the social, economical and cultural contexts, while the progressive frame with the ‘background’ model and the ‘value’ model has been against it in the notion of individuality and the principle of democracy. The former, on one hand, regards the latter’s frame as the sources of social conflicts and in the view of the latter, on the other hand, human dignity is to have the origin of the free activity of individuality.
Finally, there is one task to be reflective and solved in the competing frames of the press: Are the articles of cyber smears discussed in the sound area of public opinions? The reason to be dealt with as the future work is because each has the different conception of the freedom of expression in the frame models. By this feature, in particular, a critical conflict between the conservative and the progressive is to be justified, so that we can take the code of ‘conflict’ for granted in public discussions. To overcome the problem of fixed frames in reporting articles, therefore, it is still important that the principle of checks and balances in presses be also activated.