In the space of three weeks, South Korea has seen a brief declaration of martial law, its sudden repeal and the impeachment of its president, Yoon Suk Yeol.
One underappreciated driver of the recent drama is the rise of YouTube-based agitators, activists and influencers, who both benefit from and fuel a new brand of populism. The effects in South Korea are stark – but the trend is global.
An extremely online constituency
In South Korea’s 2022 election, Yoon trailed his opponent for much of the campaign. His aggressive populist politics drew some support, but he looked set to fail.
Then he found a new constituency – a group of active and partisan young men focused on abolishing the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family. These agitators used YouTube and other platforms to broadcast their message.
Along with traditional conservative voters, this crowd enabled Yoon to achieve a narrow win and control of South Korea’s most powerful political position. He then duly abolished the gender ministry, saying structural sexism was “a thing of the past”.
After gaining power, Yoon issued arrest orders for several of his perceived political opponents. Among these was Kim Eo-Jun, a critical and inflammatory YouTube journalist, and a polarising populist figure tied to liberal politics. Kim’s weekly videos broadcast news, guest interviews and caustic commentary to millions of active followers.
We have grown used to the idea that social media platforms influence democratic processes by spreading news and analysis and directing users’ attention by recommending particular content. However, the increasing political visibility of platform actors such as Kim suggests the influence is becoming more direct.
Platforms for populist news and views
Social media platforms provide access to a wide range of news and media producers, from legacy outlets to independent commentators at the furthest edges of the political spectrum. However, not all of the news gets equal attention.
Research shows, at least in South Korea, false news gets more likes and interactions than verifiable news. “Real news” tends to receive dislikes and derision.
More South Korean research shows citizens may use platforms to seek out conspiracy theories and pour scorn on disliked political groups or decisions. Users also notoriously direct hate towards issues such as women’s rights.
These problems are not limited to South Korea. Polarising and populist news and analysis is a global phenomenon.
Trust in traditional news media is declining, in part due to fears it is aligned with elite and powerful figures. These fears are often confirmed by social media influencers who are seeking to become the new opinion leaders.
Online influencers are great vehicles for populist politics. They have intimate connections with their viewers, tend to suggest simplistic solutions, and usually resist accountability and fact checking.
Platforms are often more likely to recommend polarising and even radicalising content to viewers, crowding out more balanced content.
Platforms for journalism?
However, these polarising figures are not alone in these spaces. Veteran journalists and newcomers are adjusting to platforms while still providing reliable information.
On YouTube, former mainstream journalists, such as Australia’s Michael West and the American Phil Edwards, have amassed followings while blending personal and casual content with more traditional journalism.
Non-journalists, such as Money & Macro and the English Tom Nicholas, have expanded their influence through adopting some core journalistic practices. They produce content that investigates, explores and explains current affairs news and analysis with the support of their many viewers.
These YouTube news influencers show journalistic content can contribute to the new news media ecosystem and attract large audiences without relying on populist and polarising content.
“Newsfluencers” producing journalism on platforms, such as YouTube, tailor their content to the conventions of the platforms.
Newsfluencers and the future
Newsfluencers often film in informal settings rather than traditional sets, and build a casual rapport with their audience. They leverage “authenticity”, going out of their way to “avoid looking like polished corporate media”.
Their multiple revenue streams include ads, sponsors, merchandise and, most importantly, direct audience contributions. These contributions may come via memberships or via third-party platforms such as Patreon and Substack.
Even major news organisations such as Australia’s ABC have begun adopting YouTuber norms. While produced under the aegis of the national broadcaster, the current affairs podcast If You’re Listening, for example, significantly out-performs traditionally formatted content with its casual style and focus on giving the audience what it wants.
In South Korea, YouTube channels such as VoiceOfSeoul make similar moves, combining street coverage with informal talk-show panels and investigative journalism. OhMyTV weaves together YouTuber and breaking news styles, and carries hyperlinks for personal contributions and sponsorships.
At the same time, legacy media such as KBS maintains a strong following through TV and portal sites like Naver. However, KBS’s conventional format struggles to achieve comparable viewership on these increasingly dominant platforms where these unconventional journalists have managed to thrive.
There is a clear space for journalism on YouTube and similar platforms. However, it will need to adapt.
As the South Korean experience shows, the time may be coming when platform journalism is vital for democracy.
Timothy Koskie, Postdoctoral Researcher, School of Media and Communications, University of Sydney and Christopher James Hall, PhD Researcher, Centre for Media Transition, University of Technology Sydney
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
