신공화주의 논의를 통해 재상상하는 표현의 자유 - 비지배자유와 균형된 미디어 개념을 중심으로 -


Freedom of Speech Reimagined through Neo-republicanism - Focusing on the Concepts of Nondomination and Balanced Media -

손영준, 허만섭

피인용수 : 0(자료제공 : 네이버학술정보)



The present study philosophically reimagines freedom of speech, the fundamentals of journalism, based on the discussions of Pettit’s (1998, 2000, 2002, 2008, 2012, 2014, 2019) neo-republicanism. Neorepublicanism attempts to transcend the limits of liberalism and communitarianism by grafting the opposing values of freedom and common good to the concept of non-domination. In particular, it is recognized as one of the mainstream political philosophies by providing practical methodologies that guarantee the sovereignty and freedom of citizens in the fields of elections, government, parliament, judiciary, and the media. This study discussed neo-republicanism related to the media from journalism’s perspectives. According to the results, liberalism defines freedom of speech as the freedom to determine the scope of expression for oneself. However, neo-republicanism points out that people used to suppress their expression due to invisible pressure from the powerful. In this case, they decide the scope of expression themselves, but they do not enjoy true freedom. In neo-republicanism, this situation of suppressing speech to avoid conflict with the powerful is defined as a state in which the desire of the powerful controls the speaker’s freedom of expression without visible interference. Nondomination does not tolerate even the possibility that the speaker may be interfered with by someone else’s will one day. The concept of non-domination provides a theoretical foundation for protecting freedom of speech more practically than liberal philosophy. In addition, compared to republicanism, which prioritizes the common good over personal freedom, neo-republicanism advocates freedom of speech much more but sets nondomination, including freedom of speech, as an ultimate goal of the community harmonizing freedom of speech and the common good. After all, journalists have freedom of speech in a state of nondomination that is entirely free from arbitrary interference by those in power. Nondomination entails the external freedoms of the press, whose laws guarantee the independence of the media in its establishment, management, and news reporting. When journalists oppose arbitrary interference in their offices while compiling news, the inner freedom of the press is sufficiently obtained. A civic control over the state, called contestatory democracy, is embodied by balanced media, independent public broadcasting, watchdog bodies, and a healthy public sphere. When a medium is biased, hired journalists only have limited freedom of speech and are likely to fail to provide various information to their audiences. According to the review, neo-republicanism requires journalists to build a balanced media to achieve complete freedom of speech. In particular, balanced media is the image of the ideal media that all journalists must pursue and is presented as an essential device for practicing freedom of speech and the press. Similar to the logic claimed by this theoretical framework, South Korean journalists take into account their politically or economically biased superior’s potential interference and refrain from producing news that does not fit the superior’s taste through their self-censorship. This tendency reduces freedom of speech and diversity in the public sphere. The media’s bias reduces journalists’ freedom, which leads to a vicious cycle that further reinforces the media’s bias in South Korea. As the number of biased media increases, the social credibility of the media declines, the nondomination of civil society weakens due to the distortion of the public sphere, and the crisis of journalism deepens. In this discussion, the issue of freedom of speech has a cultural and practical character that calls for changes in the news production practices of the South Korean media. Few studies have dealt with the relationship between media bias and decreased freedom of speech. Still, in this study, it is clarified in detail through the mediation of neo-republicanism concepts.


이 연구는 신공화주의 논의를 바탕으로 저널리즘의 기초인 표현의 자 유를 철학적으로 재상상한다. 자유주의는 표현의 범위를 스스로 정하는 자유로 표현의 자유를 규정하지만, 신공화주의는 사람이 무언의 압박을 받아 스스로 표현을 억제하는 점을 지적한다. 결국, 언론인은 권력자의 임의적, 자의적 간섭에서 완전히 벗어나는 비지배자유 상태에서 표현의 자유를 갖는다. 비지배는 언론사 설립・경영・취재・보도의 독립성을 법으 로 보장받는 언론기관의 외적 자유를 끌어낸다. 나아가, 언론인이 사내의 임의적 통제에 대해서도 대항할 수 있을 때 언론기관의 내적 자유는 완 성된다. 국가에 대한 시민적 통제인 견제적 민주주의는 균형된 미디어, 독립적 공영방송, 파수견 기관들, 그리고 건강한 공론장으로 구현된다. 특 히, 균형된 미디어는 이상적 언론상(像)이자, 표현의 자유를 위한 필수적 장치로 제시된다. 언론사가 편향적일 때 소속 언론인은 자기검열에 나서 거나 가시적 간섭을 받음으로써 제한된 표현의 자유만 행사하고 다양한 정보의 제공에 실패한다. 이렇게, 신공화주의 개념들은 표현의 자유를 실 질적으로 보장하는 이론적 토대를 제공한다. 표현의 자유는 언론인의 변 화를 촉구하는 문화적 실천적 성격을 갖게 된다.


Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 신공화주의에서의 자유
1. 공화・자유주의의 절충
2. 비지배자유
3. 견제적 민주주의
Ⅲ. 신공화주의 관점으로 논의되는 표현의 자유
1. 비지배자유와 표현의 자유
2. 견제적 민주주의와 균형된 미디어
Ⅳ. 결론


  • 손영준 Son, Young Jun. 국민대학교 언론정보학부 교수, 언론학 박사
  • 허만섭 Heo, Man Sup. 국민대학교 교양대학 부교수, 언론학 박사


자료제공 : 네이버학술정보

    함께 이용한 논문

      ※ 기관로그인 시 무료 이용이 가능합니다.

      • 8,200원

      0개의 논문이 장바구니에 담겼습니다.