Cultural politics in the South Korean cultural industries: confrontations between state-developmentalism and neoliberalism

Abstract

This paper examines Korea’s cultural policy in tandem with the Korean Wave. It maps out the vital role of the Korean government in the Korean Wave phenomenon in the midst of the confrontations between neoliberal globalization and developmentalism. It investigates the ways in which Korea has developed the Korean Wave by analysing whether or not neoliberal ideologies have completely altered state developmentalism. More specifically, it studies the major characteristics of each administration between 1993 and 2016 in cultural policy, leading to the theorization of the nation-state in the context of the Korean Wave. Since studies of cultural policy assume that a wide range of policy tools are available to a government in promoting its cultural industries, it examines not only major cultural policy directions driven by each president, but also governmental practices executed at the level of the executive branch, in particular, the Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism.

Keywords:

• Neoliberal policy
• state-led developmentalism
• the Korean Wave
• cultural industries

Notes

1. K-pop was relatively unknown to the global music markets until early 2001 when SM Entertainment began to promote a teenage-girl singer named BoA who precisely targeted the Japanese market (Jung 2013). In the music industry, the foreign export includes recorded music (sales of music CDs), digital music (online sales), and music events, including music concerts. However, given rampant illegal downloads of music, the popularity of K-pop in the 2010s could be much bigger than the money value mentioned above (MCST 2012).

2. For example, the Korean cultural industries, such as broadcasting and film, had to develop their own local cultural products because many cable program providers had not enough budget to import foreign programs in the post 1997 economic crisis and also they were mandated to do so according to their government-issued licences and programing guidelines.

3. Then, the cultural industries were not the main part of the national economy and popular culture was not a tangible commodity for the governments who pursued export-led economic policies.

4. Admitting diverse approaches and interpretations, this essay mainly interprets the nation-building process from a political economy approach because the Korean government mainly utilized the notion of nation-building for the development of the national economy. As Mosco (1996, 200) argued, ‘processes of nation-building are viewed as occupying a political space either supporting or resisting the economic imperative,’ and therefore nation-building is a political economy process. Of course,

nation building is more than a political or a cultural question led by governments, because it is also ‘an economic strategy for determining the most appropriate way of consolidating an economic system based on industry, commercial relations and professional know-how.’ This means that we must accept that ‘national identity, as a collective identity, is defined not only by the producers’ proposal.

At the same time, “it must be known how the production process works, how television programs and films define the nation, ‘on which terms cultural policy is involved in the process, and which economic and political factors must be taken into account“ (Enric 2007, 50).

5. In the realm of culture, the direct distribution rights of Hollywood studios started in 1988, which was forced by the U.S. government and Hollywood studios cleared indicated that the Korean government started to develop neoliberal reforms by deregulating and liberalizing the cultural markets.

6. The exports of domestic films plummeted, from $76 million in 2004 to only $13.6 million in 2010, with a slight recovery in recent years (e.g. $29.3 million in 2015) (Korean Film Council 2016).

7. President Park Geun-hye was removed from office on 10 March 2017, as the Korean Constitutional Court unanimously upheld a parliamentary vote to impeach her for her role in a corruption and influence-peddling scandal. The impeachment marks a historic moment in Korea that adopted democracy only 30 years ago. In sharp contrast with Korea’s history of military coups, peaceful protests this time led to the removal of an elected leader (Fifield 2017). President Park became Korea’s first president to be impeached, and this resulted in quick elections for a new president to be held within 60 days, that was held in 9 May 2017.