The administration of President Lee Jae-myung is facing criticism for an apparent over-reliance on social media for communication. During a recent public event, President Lee sparked controversy by suggesting that migrant workers contribute little to the South Korean economy because they send their earnings back home. While he aimed to emphasize the importance of increasing domestic employment in agriculture to boost local consumption, critics argue that this perspective ignores the realities of rural areas that heavily depend on migrant labor. Statements that differentiate between domestic and foreign workers based on economic contributions risk fostering xenophobia.
The Korean Confederation of Trade Unions condemned President Lee's remarks, labeling migrant workers as 'remittance machines.' Even within the ruling coalition, some have described his comments as 'ignorant and prejudiced.' The controversy surrounding the president's remarks highlights a broader issue: the limitations of governance when spontaneous social media communication takes precedence over carefully vetted official messages.
Social media can be an effective tool for direct communication with the public and for quickly disseminating policy information. However, bypassing the necessary reviews and coordination with relevant departments can undermine the predictability of governance. Unrefined statements can lead to confusion within the government and exacerbate social tensions. If cabinet members and civil servants are preoccupied with responding to late-night messages rather than focusing on policy development, the autonomy and efficiency of the government may be compromised. Even lawmakers aligned with President Lee, such as Jeong Seong-ho, have suggested the need to reduce the frequency of social media communications.
Despite this, President Lee continues to refer to social media as his 'lifeline' and maintains his current approach. Having risen to power through social media while serving as mayor of Seongnam and governor of Gyeonggi Province, he has used it to rally support and navigate political crises. However, what worked for opposition politicians may not be effective for a sitting president. The president's statements are perceived not just as personal opinions but as reflections of government policy and the nation's official stance. When direct communication aimed at supporters becomes the government's message to the entire populace, it necessitates greater responsibility and restraint.
President Lee's approval ratings remain stagnant in the 30% range, but it is unclear how social media communication has impacted these numbers. It is worth considering whether his direct outreach is persuading moderates and undecided voters beyond his base. What may come across as candidness to supporters could be interpreted as arrogance and recklessness by others.
What President Lee needs is not to sever ties with social media but to change his communication approach. While quick expressions of opinion can be made via social media, policies and national issues should be explained officially after thorough review and coordination. The roles of his aides and relevant departments extend beyond merely conveying the president's messages; they must also anticipate the implications of his statements and filter out potential misjudgments.
Just because social media has been a tool for political success does not mean it should dictate the principles of governance. As the president becomes accustomed to the cheers of his supporters, he risks closing himself off to dissenting voices. An obsession with direct communication can weaken the governance system. What is needed is not the frequency of messages but a sense of responsibility in weighing their significance. The public does not wish to hear every thought from the president in real-time. If the increasing volume of his posts undermines trust in governance, a change in communication strategy is essential.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.