Search results

South Korea imposes more stringent restrictions on political speeches during elections than many other democratic countries. The purpose of this paper is to examine the long‐standing conflict between citizens and institutions in the Korean electoral environment and the effects of the internet on this conflict.

The paper provides a case study of the 2007 presidential election in Korea. During the campaign period, two video clips (one on YouTube and the other on Daum, a major domestic web portal) emerged and implicated the then‐leading candidate in a financial scandal. The paper investigates how these video clips were shared and discussed among Korean voters, even though the country's election laws restricted the sharing of such information in cyberspace. The paper employs a combination of network analysis techniques, including hyperlink analysis, interaction network analysis, and semantic network analysis.

YouTube served as a medium for Korean voters to circumvent local electoral regulations, thus implying the neologism “cyber‐exile”. However, unlike Daum, YouTube failed to facilitate discussions on the posted video clip. The discussion through its comment feature was often derailed by irrelevant comments from seemingly uninterested parties. The address of the video clip was shared through personal blogs and online bulletin boards in Korean cyberspace, but these efforts led only to a fragmented sphere.

Any comparison between YouTube and Daum should be made with caution because of inherent differences between the two platforms.

The results have important practical implications for those interested in designing e‐deliberation environments. For example, they should have a clearer understanding of the composition of users and the undesirable consequences of a fragmented public sphere.

This paper highlights how pre‐internet institutions shape its members’ political activity on the internet. In addition, the results clearly demonstrate that an innovative effort to circumvent barriers on the part of internet users is not enough to harness the potential of online discussions for a measured and sustained discourse on the issue at hand.