South Korea has long been recognised as a pilot market for multinational companies due to its homogeneous market characteristics and rapid consumer responses. This unique environment allows businesses to quickly gauge the potential success of new products and services before global launches. A similar dynamic can be observed in the nation’s political landscape, where rapid information dissemination and public reactions amplify political phenomena.
In December 2024, President Yoon Suk Yeol declared martial law, citing threats from alleged anti-state activities. This unprecedented move triggered widespread protests and a swift response from lawmakers, who convened to nullify the declaration. The situation escalated when supporters of the impeached president stormed the Seoul Western District Court, resulting in injuries and significant property damage. Post-martial law, South Korean society finds itself in a state of psychological pseudo-civil war, reflecting deeper societal divides.
The recent political turmoil in Korea should not be dismissed as a local issue; it signals the breakdown of public discourse and the dangers of radicalised political leadership undermining democracy. Globally, partisan polarisation has been exacerbated by media algorithms that create echo chambers and filter bubbles. Citizens are increasingly trapped in confirmation bias—a cognitive tendency to seek information that aligns with their existing beliefs.
This phenomenon, accelerated by social media and amplified by politicians and politicised cults, is not confined to Korea. Even in countries like Germany and France, known for their strong traditions of negotiation and coalition-building among parties, the rise of far-left and far-right movements has disrupted parliamentary cooperation, leading to deadlocks and challenging the policy-making process. Former U.S. President Barack Obama, in his 2022 Stanford University speech, highlighted how tech platforms contribute to societal divisions by spreading misinformation and eroding trust in democratic institutions, creating fertile ground for autocratic tendencies.
A significant contributor to this polarisation is the role of media algorithms. In South Korea, a substantial portion of the population relies on platforms like YouTube for news. According to Reuters’ 2024 Digital News Report, approximately 53% of South Koreans consume news via YouTube, compared to the global average of 30% across 46 surveyed countries. Additionally, only one in three Koreans trust traditional media, compared to an average of 40% globally. YouTube content has assumed the role of journalism but often lacks adherence to its foundational principles. A 2023 study by the National Assembly Research Service found that 87% of YouTube content covering political events was opinion-based, with only 10% presenting factual information. Conspiracy theories thrive in the void left by the collapse of healthy public discourse.
What can think tanks do?
Addressing this issue demands proactive strategies from think tanks to mitigate the adverse effects of media algorithms and combat conspiracy theories. Existing literature on conspiracy theories suggests three primary interventions: prevention, punishment, and education.
Content creation
In today’s digital environment, cutting off communication channels is virtually impossible. Instead, efforts should focus on removing the conditions that allow conspiracy theories to thrive. Individuals who resonate with radical information often feel frustrated and alienated by their societal circumstances. Far-left and far-right messages gain traction by exploiting public frustration, as confirmation bias offers a comforting and self-satisfying narrative.
Think tanks can play a pivotal role by conducting evidence-based research to understand the needs and desires of vulnerable citizens. Addressing societal grievances can help defuse the emotional triggers that fuel polarisation.
Education
Education represents another avenue where think tanks can have a significant impact. These institutions can develop programs to enhance media literacy among the public, educating citizens on how algorithms shape the information they receive. By becoming more critical consumers of content, individuals can recognise bias, seek diverse perspectives, and reduce the influence of echo chambers. Facilitating dialogues among divided groups is another strategy. Think tanks can organise forums that bring together individuals from across the political spectrum, fostering respectful debates and promoting mutual understanding.
Punishment
The concept of punishment, however, requires a broader and more nuanced approach. Think tanks can assist in crafting policies that address the challenges posed by media algorithms. This includes advocating for transparency in content curation and promoting regulations to reduce misinformation and algorithm-induced polarisation. Global collaboration among think tanks is crucial in developing comprehensive guidelines for policymakers and world leaders to tackle these challenges effectively. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, think tanks across the globe worked together to provide policy recommendations on public health, economic recovery, and vaccine distribution. This demonstrated the power of international cooperation in addressing complex, cross-border issues. By pooling expertise and fostering dialogue, think tanks can ensure that the policies they advocate for are well-rounded and applicable on a global scale. Furthermore, such collaborations can enhance their ability to investigate how media algorithms contribute to societal divisions, providing insights that inform the development of algorithms prioritising diverse viewpoints and reducing polarisation.
Countering the effects of polarisation on think tanks
It is essential to acknowledge that think tanks are not immune to polarisation. Partisan leanings within these institutions can influence their research and policy recommendations. To mitigate political polarisation effectively, think tanks must maintain objectivity, grounding their work in rigorous, evidence-based analysis. By doing so, they can serve as neutral arbiters in a divided society, offering clarity amidst the noise of algorithm-driven content.
South Korea exemplifies the rapid amplification of political phenomena through media algorithms. Think tanks have a pivotal role in addressing the resulting polarisation. By promoting media literacy, conducting insightful research, facilitating cross-ideological dialogue, and advising on thoughtful policy development, these institutions can help navigate the challenges of the digital age and strengthen democratic resilience.
Find out more about South Korean think tanks.