Unlike the public, which is sensitive to history, the commercial sector often displays a troubling insensitivity. A recent series of incidents in the cultural and retail industries highlighted a significant lack of historical sensitivity. The backlash from trivializing painful modern history and traditions for profit has been severe.
The most egregious misstep occurred in the retail sector. On May 18, the 46th anniversary of the Gwangju Democracy Movement, Starbucks Korea named a tumbler discount event "Tank Day" and included the phrase "Bang!" in promotional materials. This trivialized the tanks used by the military to crush citizens and the absurd explanations given by police during the 1987 torture and death of Park Jong-cheol.
The controversy spread rapidly. Shinsegae Group quickly canceled the event and dismissed its president in an attempt to mitigate the fallout, but public sentiment remained cold, leading to a boycott of Starbucks.
On May 20, President Lee Jae-myung weighed in, recalling a previous controversy involving Musinsa's sock advertisement, stating, "Money may be the root of all evil, but this is unacceptable." His remarks served as a direct warning against crossing ethical lines in pursuit of profit.
The entertainment industry has not fared any better. The MBC drama "21st Century Daegunbuin," which had a budget of 30 billion won, faced backlash for its poor historical accuracy. It hid behind the guise of a fictional constitutional monarchy while depicting a fictional emperor's rule, even introducing a dubious Chinese-style tea ceremony that could be seen as a nod to historical revisionism. This echoed the painful mistakes of previous productions, such as the 2021 SBS drama "Joseon Exorcist," which was canceled after two episodes due to controversy over its Chinese-style presentation, and tvN's "Mr. Queen," which faced legal sanctions for belittling historical records.
Despite the severity of the situation, the writers and directors responsible for historical accuracy have been slow to reflect on their actions, leaving the lead actors to face public outrage and apologize tearfully. The government's response, which involved discussing the potential recovery of funding after the controversy erupted, has been criticized as typical bureaucratic mismanagement, lacking proactive measures.
Given that the memories of our struggle for independence and democracy are still vivid, it is natural for the public to be sensitive to historical issues. If shallow commercialism and irresponsible creativity continue to fill the void left by a lack of proper historical understanding, there is no way to avoid public backlash. A few insincere apologies cannot cover the deep and damaging wounds that have been inflicted on the public's historical consciousness.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.