IT WAS A NIGHT OF RACISM AND CLASS SNOBBERY at a private dinner between journalists and a top education policy maker. After one too many drinks in Seoul’s government district, an elite bureaucrat, Na Hyang-wook, lambasted “99 percent” of his countrymen for being “like dogs and pigs” who only need to be fed and kept alive, compared them to “blacks and Hispanics in the United States who don’t even try to enter politics or climb the social ladder,” and called for a caste system on the basis that “people are not all born equal.”
在一場記者們和高階教育官員的私人晚宴上，瀰滿著種族歧視和階級勢利的味道。幾杯黃杯下肚後，一位精英官僚羅享旭大罵99％韓國人「像狗和豬一樣，只需要餵養和讓他們活著就好，和美國那些從不試圖進入政界或提升社會地位的黑人和拉美裔並沒有什麼不同」。羅享旭還認為，應在「人非生來平等」的基礎上建立種姓制度。
His personal goal, he told the journalists, was to strive to be in the 1 percent. He offered limited sympathy for the death of a 19-year-old subway contract laborer overworked and crushed by an oncoming train, as noted in recent stories about poor conditions for part-time workers. The journalists said that they felt pain for him like he was their own child, but the bureaucrat retorted that while his death was certainly tragic, it would have been silly to pretend the subway worker was his own kid.
羅享旭告訴記者，他的個人目標，就是致力成為那1個百分點。在最近有關非全職工人勞動權益的報導中，羅享旭對於日前因超時工作被火車撞死的19歲地鐵契約工，也不留情面。許多記者說，他們對這名年輕工人的死感到難過，就像是失去自己的孩子一樣，但羅享旭卻反駁，雖然工人的死亡是場悲劇，但要假裝是自己的孩子是愚蠢的行為。
That evening, July 7, was odd even by South Korean standards, and stretched journalism ethics to the max. The biggest problem was that no sensible official would have confided in the two reporters on the other end of the table. The pair was Chang Eun-gyo and Song Hyun-sook, from the left-wing Kyunghyang newspaper, a sort of Nation in South Korea known for its fiery anti-establishment reporting.
那天晚上，7月7日，就韓國的標準來說是弔詭的，有關新聞倫理邊界也被拉扯到極限。最大的問題是，這位不理智的官員竟對在場的兩位記者吐實。這兩位是來自左翼媒體京鄉新聞的張銀嬌和宋賢肅。京鄉新聞在韓國以強悍的反建制的報導聞名。
Chang, 36, the editor in charge at the meeting, has built a career as a firebrand reporter challenging the status quo, with aggressive reporting on wealth inequality and labor issues. In 2009, she was part of a team that won a sort of local Pulitzer, the Korean Journalists’ Award, for covering poor standards for contract workers—similar to the dead subway laborer. She has stated that her mission as a reporter is to represent the voices of the underprivileged, placing her in opposition to the middle-of-the-road standard of journalism accepted in the West.
張銀嬌，36歲，也是這場會議的責任編輯，其記者生涯不斷挑戰現狀，熱衷於貧富不均和勞工權益等議題。在2009年，張銀嬌是得到韓國新聞獎團隊的一份子，以報導契約工的處境獲獎，這和死亡的地鐵工人情況有點類似。張銀嬌說，記者的使命是為弱勢群體發聲，並反對西方新聞所遵循的中間路線。
After the government official launched his salvo, the reporters pulled out a phone recorder, informed him that the meeting was on the record, and gave him many chances to rescind or clarify his statements, Chang told CJR. She noted there was never an explicit off-the-record agreement. Any expectation of “off the record” was an unspoken understanding common in South Korea. Intimate gatherings like these are a regularity between top officials and the journalists who cover them, intended to build relationships. Off-the-record is an expectation, but unlike in the US, it’s usually not stated outright. In South Korea, it’s often the only way of getting information.
張銀嬌告訴CJR，在這位政府官員開始了他的談話後，記者們便拿出手機記錄，並告知這段談話正在錄音，也給了他很多機會撤銷或澄清他的言論。張銀嬌指出，從來就沒有一個明確的「非正式談話」協議。「非正式談話」的協議在韓國是私下的默契。在韓國，高層官員和記者之間的私人聚會是常態，旨在建立彼此的關係。「非正式談話」是一種期望，但不像美國，它通常沒有明講。在韓國，它往往是獲取消息的唯一途徑。
Despite this, and the journalists’ promise to quote him, the civil servant Na pushed on with his tirade. (Na has never disputed these claims, but has said that his comments were the result of drunkenness.)
儘管如此，記者表示將引用他的談話，身為人民公僕的羅享旭仍持續自己的謬論（羅享旭從未否定這些說法，僅表示他的失言是酒醉所造成的）。
The reporters left the meeting in disgust, but government officials asked them to return for a clarification, where the official repeated himself on softer terms: “The United States has a such-and-such class society, and wouldn’t it be okay to take a similar path?” he said, according to the newspaper. The next day, Kyunghyang held a newsroom meeting to discuss the ethics of publication and whether it had news value. Was this any old drunken rant, or something worth pursuing?
記者們帶著厭惡的心情離開這次會面，但政府官員們又要求他們返回並澄清，並企圖掩飾他的言論。根據這篇報導，羅享旭說：「美國有一個類似的階級社會，韓國若遵循此例又何嘗不可？」第二天，京鄉針對此事件召開有關出版規範的編輯會議，並討論是否具有新聞價值等問題。這不是酒後失言，或新聞價值的取捨這麼簡單而已。
Consider this: At South Korea’s biggest newspapers, along with many East Asian publications, self-censorship and anonymous sourcing are the status quo. Japanese and Korean reporters are often sorted out into press clubs, tied to ministries and corporations, which lay down the rules and whack reporters whose coverage is out of line. With power concentrated in a handful of corporate conglomerates, many newspapers cater to advertisers in a way far more extreme than in the US, and dole out bad coverage to companies that don’t pay up. When the options for covering your country—or its corporations—are all weak, journalistic short-cuts can be the only way to publishing honest stories.
試想一下：韓國最大的報紙，和許多東亞出版物一樣，自我審查和匿名消息來源是常有的事。日本和韓國的記者，通常會加入記者團體，和政府部門和企業有緊密的關聯，這等同制定規則和預防記者做出不當的報導。隨著權力集中在少數企業集團手上，許多報紙迎合廣告客戶的情況更高於美國，不願意配合付錢的公司就只能得到比較差的新聞。當有關國家或是企業的新聞品質如此糟糕，或許付錢才是得到真實報導的唯一途徑。
After a long back-and-forth, the editors agreed to go with it. This was not a mid-level bureaucrat spouting inebriated nonsense, but a top official whose mandate was to craft policy that would educate the next generation. Since he expressed a sentiment so recklessly against his public mission—and given plenty of opportunities for a retraction with his spokesman present—the story had reached an ethical threshold. The decision was a careful one, and weighed the values of the journalists at stake. “I am always haunted by a fear about whether what I’m doing is the right thing. Responsibility is a prerequisite,” Chang once told the website “jobdastory.”
經過一番討論後，編輯部同意刊出這則新聞。這不是一個中階官員而已，而是一位擬定下一代教育政策的高階官員酒後的胡亂發言。自從他違背公眾使命出此狂言後，他的發言人也被給予了足夠的機會澄清，現在這篇報導已碰觸到道德的界限。這項決定是如此謹慎，並攸關記者所代表的價值。「我對於做正確的事總是戒慎恐懼，責任感是先決條件」張銀嬌曾對韓國網站「jobdastory」這麼說。
After publication, the Prime Minister apologized; the civil servant, whose record was otherwise impeccable, was fired. The debacle weighed on the national mood, with younger South Koreans resentful over wealth inequality and calling their country “Hell Korea.”
新聞出版後，韓國總理黃教安出面道歉，身為人民公僕，要不是他的紀錄無可挑剔，也可能要為此下台負責。這次事件影響全國情緒，韓國年輕人對貧富不均的情緒高漲，稱呼他們的國家為「地獄韓國」。
Journalists in the US would frown on publishing any off-record comment. The Associated Press ethics handbook says that “off the record” simply means “the information cannot be used for publication.” The New York Times’s former public editor Margaret Sullivan has said the newspaper “was and is obligated” to honor off-the-record agreements with presidential candidates. Whether “off the record” means not for attribution, or not publishable at all, has been a longstanding debate. But it always means the source should be able to trust the reporter to be discreet.
美國的記者會對發布任何「非正式」言論而感到憂心。美聯社新聞手冊寫著：非正式的言論意味著「不能做為出版使用」；紐約時報前公共編輯Margaret Sullivan表示，該報和總統候選人對於「非正式言論」的協議，一直都有責任。無論「非正式言論」代表著不能確信消息來源，或是完全不能發表，這仍是一個長期存在的爭論。但它意味著消息來源要能夠完全的信任記者才行。
—————————
作者：Geoffrey Cain
編譯：朱弘川
原文網址： http://www.cjr.org/analysis/south_korea_journalist_off_the_record.php
