총 44페이지
30페이지 본문시작
In-depth on Culture
one of the hottest topics. As of 2019, some people started
introducedtheunderwear.
toarguethatmanyYouTubersorOTTstreamerspromoted
products to earn money, without any notice to watchers.
It was not taken seriously, though. Later, Aug. 3, 2020, a
Cause1 OnlookingOTTplatforms:slapon
famous YouTuber live streamed while he was quite drunk
thewristandlazyresponse
anddisclosed,“SomanypopularYouTubersaredoingfalse
advertising,andtheygetbigmoneyforeveryvideo.”This
A few OTT streamers have been cracked down because
causedabigsocialimpact.
of social controversy. For example live streamer C of
The old “product placement”?an indirect method
AfreecaTV had several offensive incidents on his live
of advertising, often called PPL?was already widely
streaming impersonating a notorious criminal who
prevalent; thus, the public did not take serious issue with
committedhomiciderapeofachild,insultingtheGwangju
influencers taking advertising money. The problem is
Uprising on May 18, 1980, or belittling the socially
the “proper notice of advertisement,” which was strictly
vulnerable, including the disabled, and more. These
observed in the old media, was completely ignored in the
troubleswerebroadcastedontheland-basedTVnews,and
new media; people had no chance to know if it was an
he received a permanent ban from AfreecaTV where he
advertisement or not. At the expense of watchers’ right to
waslivestreaming.
know, they made a great deal of money. Many watchers
Nevertheless, AfreecaTV triggered an argument by
took this as a serious betrayal for them, and the aftermath
acceptinghiscomebacktotheplatform.Thoughhisvideos
was massive. As a number of YouTubers were revealed to
were less outrageous than his previous fruits, his antics
have surreptitiously taken ad money, a relay of apologies
reappeared,suchascursingexcessivelyonhisliveshowor
unfolded; others who were not even mentioned hitherto
making distorted statements of Korea’s venerable history.
voluntarilyconfessedtheirwrongdoing.
Theplatformdecidedtogivehimnolessthana7-day-ban
An internet entertainment magazine intensively analyzed
for each matter, consequently. After expanding his field to
the false ad controversy of YouTubers, and they especially
YouTube,hehasbecomeafamousYouTubesuper-starwho
focused on a famous stylist, Han, and a popular singer,
hitsalmostamillionviewsinafewdays.
Kang. According to the magazine and many YouTube
YouTube made some efforts to discipline those
videos that also scrutinized their issues, Han uploaded
troublemakers in its own way. For instance, it gave a
videos that introduced her favorite clothes and beauty
permanentbantoaYouTuberwhomadevideosthatlargely
products. However, it turned out that most of those videos
degraded morality and humanity; he was even mentioned
were sponsored by companies, and she was being paid
during the National Assembly hearing in 2017 by the
20 to 30 million won (US$17,674 to $26,511) per video.
Minister of Gender Equality and Family. To avoid the
Meanwhile, Kang introduced products naturally in her
sanction,hemade73accountsunderdisguisedownership,
dailylifevideos,butshedidnotgiveanynoticeabouther
butalleventuallygotbanned.
paidsponsorships.Moreover,shewasalsopaidtopromote
Although not to as great an extent as the improbable
lingerie, but because it could not be exposed in the same
YouTuber did, there are still so many YouTubers making
way as other items, she made a special video that directly
trouble, excessively cursing, doing fake shows and false
advertising, etc., but most do not receive any punishment.
Kang So-young, Chair of the Dept. of Moving Image and
TV
Media Communication at Seoul Digital University and
Nareum
a commissioner of the Press Arbitration Commission,
ⓒYouTube
points out: “I can wholly confirm the lack of regulation
onOTTcontent.Thereisnotasinglelawthatcancontrol
OTT content including YouTube videos. OTT content
is not regulated by the Broadcasting Act but regulated
by the Communications Act, meaning that only the
hardware?telecommunications?are under sanction; thus,
the software?the actual content of the communication
methods?isoutofthelegalobservation.”
▲AYouTuberaplogizesforherfalseadvertising.
28
www.theargus.org
one of the hottest topics. As of 2019, some people started
introducedtheunderwear.
toarguethatmanyYouTubersorOTTstreamerspromoted
products to earn money, without any notice to watchers.
It was not taken seriously, though. Later, Aug. 3, 2020, a
Cause1 OnlookingOTTplatforms:slapon
famous YouTuber live streamed while he was quite drunk
thewristandlazyresponse
anddisclosed,“SomanypopularYouTubersaredoingfalse
advertising,andtheygetbigmoneyforeveryvideo.”This
A few OTT streamers have been cracked down because
causedabigsocialimpact.
of social controversy. For example live streamer C of
The old “product placement”?an indirect method
AfreecaTV had several offensive incidents on his live
of advertising, often called PPL?was already widely
streaming impersonating a notorious criminal who
prevalent; thus, the public did not take serious issue with
committedhomiciderapeofachild,insultingtheGwangju
influencers taking advertising money. The problem is
Uprising on May 18, 1980, or belittling the socially
the “proper notice of advertisement,” which was strictly
vulnerable, including the disabled, and more. These
observed in the old media, was completely ignored in the
troubleswerebroadcastedontheland-basedTVnews,and
new media; people had no chance to know if it was an
he received a permanent ban from AfreecaTV where he
advertisement or not. At the expense of watchers’ right to
waslivestreaming.
know, they made a great deal of money. Many watchers
Nevertheless, AfreecaTV triggered an argument by
took this as a serious betrayal for them, and the aftermath
acceptinghiscomebacktotheplatform.Thoughhisvideos
was massive. As a number of YouTubers were revealed to
were less outrageous than his previous fruits, his antics
have surreptitiously taken ad money, a relay of apologies
reappeared,suchascursingexcessivelyonhisliveshowor
unfolded; others who were not even mentioned hitherto
making distorted statements of Korea’s venerable history.
voluntarilyconfessedtheirwrongdoing.
Theplatformdecidedtogivehimnolessthana7-day-ban
An internet entertainment magazine intensively analyzed
for each matter, consequently. After expanding his field to
the false ad controversy of YouTubers, and they especially
YouTube,hehasbecomeafamousYouTubesuper-starwho
focused on a famous stylist, Han, and a popular singer,
hitsalmostamillionviewsinafewdays.
Kang. According to the magazine and many YouTube
YouTube made some efforts to discipline those
videos that also scrutinized their issues, Han uploaded
troublemakers in its own way. For instance, it gave a
videos that introduced her favorite clothes and beauty
permanentbantoaYouTuberwhomadevideosthatlargely
products. However, it turned out that most of those videos
degraded morality and humanity; he was even mentioned
were sponsored by companies, and she was being paid
during the National Assembly hearing in 2017 by the
20 to 30 million won (US$17,674 to $26,511) per video.
Minister of Gender Equality and Family. To avoid the
Meanwhile, Kang introduced products naturally in her
sanction,hemade73accountsunderdisguisedownership,
dailylifevideos,butshedidnotgiveanynoticeabouther
butalleventuallygotbanned.
paidsponsorships.Moreover,shewasalsopaidtopromote
Although not to as great an extent as the improbable
lingerie, but because it could not be exposed in the same
YouTuber did, there are still so many YouTubers making
way as other items, she made a special video that directly
trouble, excessively cursing, doing fake shows and false
advertising, etc., but most do not receive any punishment.
Kang So-young, Chair of the Dept. of Moving Image and
TV
Media Communication at Seoul Digital University and
Nareum
a commissioner of the Press Arbitration Commission,
ⓒYouTube
points out: “I can wholly confirm the lack of regulation
onOTTcontent.Thereisnotasinglelawthatcancontrol
OTT content including YouTube videos. OTT content
is not regulated by the Broadcasting Act but regulated
by the Communications Act, meaning that only the
hardware?telecommunications?are under sanction; thus,
the software?the actual content of the communication
methods?isoutofthelegalobservation.”
▲AYouTuberaplogizesforherfalseadvertising.
28
www.theargus.org
30페이지 본문끝
메뉴
현재 포커스의 아래내용들은 동일한 컨텐츠를 가지고 페이지넘김 효과및 시각적 효과를 제공하는 페이지이므로 스크린리더 사용자는 여기까지만 낭독하시고 위의 페이지이동 링크를 사용하여 다음페이지로 이동하시기 바랍니다.