From a friend in Korea, about another government proposal to restrict speech:
โI am writing to bring to your attention a newly proposed amendment to South Korea's Information and Communications Network Actโlegislation that I believe deserves urgent international attention because of its potential implications for freedom of expression, democratic values, and American technology companies operating in South Korea.
Official bill:
https://t.co/bA9m8Ci6C1
This proposal goes far beyond traditional defamation law.
It creates a new category of illegal online content referred to as โmockery and hate information.โ Unlike defamation, which generally depends on factual or false factual assertions, this proposal would regulate repeated โmockery,โ โridicule,โ โhumiliation,โ and similar expressions.
Even more concerning, the bill would authorize government authorities to order the removal of content, restrict visibility, block access, limit monetization, impose administrative fines, suspend online communities or information and communications services, and, in cases of repeated violations, order the closure of all or part of a service.
This proposal comes immediately after another major revision of South Korea's Information and Communications Network Act took effect on July 7, 2026, expanding governmental authority over online speech. Before the impact of that law has even been fully evaluated, lawmakers are already proposing another significant expansion of state power over online expression.
This development raises profound concerns about freedom of expression.
Terms such as โmockery,โ โridicule,โ and โhumiliationโ are inherently subjective. Depending on how these provisions are interpreted and enforced, political satire, parody, criticism, internet memes, and controversial public debate could all become vulnerable to government intervention.
The proposal also raises serious questions about consistency in the application of free speech principles.
For years, South Korean online platforms carried repeated ridicule, sexually degrading content, and manipulated images targeting former President Park Geun-hye, former President Yoon Suk Yeol, and former First Lady Kim Keon Hee. These incidents were widely known in Korean society. During much of that period, many defended such expression as political satire or protected speech and opposed broader government regulation.
Now, however, lawmakers are seeking to grant the government broad authority to regulate โmockeryโ itself. This inevitably raises questions about whether the principles of free expression are being applied consistently, regardless of political viewpoint or the individuals involved.
The legislation may also have significant consequences for global technology companies operating in South Korea. Platforms such as Meta, Google, X, and other online services could face increasing legal and regulatory pressure through mandatory content removal, administrative penalties, suspension orders, and potential closure orders affecting services covered by the law.
Around the democratic world, governments are struggling to balance harmful online content with the protection of free speech. Recent debates in countries such as the United Kingdom have demonstrated how expanding governmental authority over online expression can generate serious concerns regarding censorship and civil liberties.
As the nation whose constitutional tradition is founded upon the First Amendment, the United States should pay close attention to developments such as this. South Korea has long been regarded as one of America's closest democratic allies. Legislation that significantly expands governmental authority over lawful online expression deserves careful scrutiny not only because of its impact on South Korea, but also because it may influence future debates over freedom of expression throughout the democratic world.โ
Watch: I asked President Trump what he'd say to Americans who don't realize that communism is knocking on their doorstep.
He gives a dire warning, saying the U.S. is now "in more danger than it was during World War I, World War II...9/11, Pearl Harbor."
"When you go communist, you never come back...You die in squalor. You die a horrible death. You die in squalor. And it gets very evil and very nasty."
"And you're right. [Communism] has become international, but it's never worked, and it's not going to work. What is working is the United States." ๐บ๐ธ๐ฅ
Watch our full conversation at the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey: