As more and more people get interested in the obvious bullshit emanating from the MIC, it becomes apparent that the MIC is engaging in its own systematic campaign of lies, but the liars aren't all on the same page yet.
I'm currently corresponding with a journalist for a major Korean paper. This journalist wrote the following (in part):
I've been able to access a number of the blogs from my office. But I don't think the problem is fixed, bloggers say they are still blocked.
I talked to the MIC and got some good comments. But I need to go a little deeper to find out what the fuck is going on. The MIC is wiping their hands clean of it and saying it’s the domain's fault - blo[g]spot, blogs, typepad.
But if that is the case, then how can I access them?
Are the Internet Service Providers at fault, like KT?
Any updates would be appreciated and helpful.
Did you get that? The MIC is claiming this is the fault of the blogging service providers. According to this official, there is no blockage.
I want that shit in writing, with a name attached-- someone with the balls to take responsibility for their claims.
I wrote back:
If the Internet providers themselves are at fault, this is news to me, and if that claim from the MIC is in writing, it needs to be reported so it can be checked on by all sorts of curious people. I think someone's lying. This really feels like PRC shenanigans: suddenly, no one's accountable. Who enacted the ban? The nebulous "They." Always someone else.
I find it ironic that the MIC chose to block Blogspot, TypePad/Movable Type, and MuNu sites, while other major (and unnamed) blogging service providers remain untouched.
Contrary to the reported claim that the MIC is blocking some "40 sites," in actuality, because entire blogging service provider DOMAINS are being blocked, it's more like millions of sites. The Korean-speaking public remains largely unaware of this, and I get the impression that, even if they knew about it, they wouldn't care: Korean Netizens are all for the ban, and argue repeatedly in its favor, citing the Kim family's need for dignity.
If there's one point that needs to be hammered home, it's the sheer hypocrisy of banning the Kim beheading video for dignity's sake while allowing the other beheading videos to be shown. It's been argued by other bloggers and readers that this evinces Korean racism, selfishness, etc. At the very least, it's an example of Hermit Kingdom-style thinking, and it could be hugely damaging to Korea's self-styled image as a premiere internet powerhouse. I don't think the exposure of this hypocrisy impresses Koreans, though.
The journalist wrote me back, quoting an MIC official who apparently doesn't deny the MIC's role in the ban:
"It's different when Koreans see another Korean get killed. It's a
different feeling than seeing a foreigner die," said the MIC official.
Yeah, damn straight it's different, you racist, dickless fuck.
I hope you all are taking notes. I hope this reporter digs up a ton of inconsistencies. I hope the Western blogosphere gets interested enough to start screaming long and loud about all this. And if we win here and kick the South Korean government in the nads, I hope we start chipping away at the bullshit in China.
In the meantime, the reporter I corresponded with plans to ring up the blogging service providers-- Blogspot and Co.-- to see whether they've been perpetrating this ban. Heh.
_
