[The Editors' Verdict] The President's Willingness to Communicate Must Not Regress to the Past

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Il-kwon] The presidents who communicated most frequently during their terms were former Presidents Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun. It is reported that each held approximately 150 briefings or press conferences directly in front of the camera during their tenure. Former President Lee Myung-bak explained current issues directly in front of the camera about 20 times. Former President Park Geun-hye held 16 such sessions, fewer than Lee, and former President Moon Jae-in is generally evaluated to have held 19, though the counting criteria differ.

Regardless of the administration, how often the highest authority holds press conferences has been a barometer determining the frequency of communication with the public. Every president in history promised to engage more actively with the public upon inauguration, often citing the number of press conferences held by their predecessor as a benchmark. This was to prove that they would communicate more frequently.

However, such promises often faded over time. Former President Park invited criticism for holding a press conference during the political scandal but only read a prepared statement without taking questions. Former President Moon stirred controversy by opting for an interview with a broadcaster’s anchor instead of a final press conference before leaving office. This was seen as an attempt to avoid difficult questions and only say what he wanted.

Recently, the Presidential Office has also sparked controversy over communication issues, similar to previous governments. From the 21st, President Yoon Suk-yeol temporarily suspended the morning Q&A sessions (door-stepping) with reporters, which serve as a communication channel. This decision followed incidents including the refusal to allow a broadcaster’s reporter to board the presidential plane and a heated argument between a reporter from the broadcaster and a presidential secretary. Prior to this, a full plywood partition was installed in the Presidential Office’s first-floor lobby where the president meets the press corps. The Presidential Office cited an “unfortunate incident” as the reason for suspending door-stepping, stating that the public quarrel between a reporter and a secretary was the cause. They added, “We judged that we cannot continue (the morning Q&A) without establishing fundamental measures to prevent recurrence.”

This decision contradicts President Yoon’s stated intention to be more proactive in communication than any previous administration. During a press conference on March 20, while still president-elect, he pledged to move the Presidential Office from the Blue House to Yongsan, saying, “It is a promise to break away from the closed space of the Blue House and always communicate with the people to properly heed their will.” When questioned whether the physical space was the issue, he responded, “I am well aware that it is also about the will to communicate. I will place a press center on the first floor of the Presidential Office to frequently communicate with the media.” At his 100-day press conference in August, he emphasized, “The biggest reason for moving the presidential office to Yongsan is door-stepping.”

Considering the significant impact of statements from the highest authority, President Yoon meeting the media daily is unprecedented. Answering questions thrown without prior notice every morning on the way to work is itself unprecedented. The physical and mental burden of preparing for this cannot be small. Despite some controversies, President Yoon’s continuation of door-stepping symbolizes the “communication philosophy” he held as a “political novice.”

Closing the communication channel altogether under the pretext of media reports may raise suspicions that “they have been waiting for an opportunity to shut it down.” During his candidacy, President Yoon pledged to “guarantee freedom of the press from all organized powers.” The responsibility that comes with press freedom should be entrusted to the function of public opinion. Our society has the capacity for self-purification.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.