[Choice Times=Se-Hyung Kim, Veteran Journalist]

PresidentLee Jae-myungdoes not attend media company events, nor does he give interviews to individual news outlets.

Yet on June 2, 2025 — the day before the presidential election, when his victory was already virtually assured by a large margin — he appeared on Kim Ou-joon’s YouTube program “Humility Is Difficult”for a lengthy interview in a friendly atmosphere.

That may have been a signal.

After that, almost all ministers, senior presidential aides in the Blue House, and Democratic Party lawmakers in Yeouido lined up to appear on Kim Ou-joon’s program.

From the perspective of conservatives, Kim Ou-joon could be described — without much exaggeration — as the ringleader who spread countless conspiracy theories and false or fake news, fueling ideological conflict between left and right.

In a column published on March 13, Munhwa Ilbo wrote that he “mixed 1 percent fact with 99 percent speculation to spread plausible conspiracy theories,” citing claims about election fraud, the theory that the Cheonan warship sank due to grounding, the allegation that the Sewol ferry was deliberately sunk, disputes over the THAAD deployment, claims of intentional failure in COVID-19 quarantine policies, and the so-called Cheongdam-dong drinking party scandal.

When such conspiracy theories were rampant in the past, I once suggested to a key figure in the ruling party:

“People now spend more time watching YouTube than watching TV or reading newspapers. Yet YouTubers with millions of viewers spread the poison of falsehood throughout society without any constraints, and they exploit it politically. Why not revise the Broadcasting Act so that the most-watched YouTube channel — Kim Ou-joon TV — would be subject to broadcasting regulations and punished if it spreads socially harmful false reports?”

The senior lawmaker’s answer was interesting.

“There’s no lawmaker who would dare say such a thing. When Kim Ou-joon pats a lawmaker on the shoulder during a broadcast and says, ‘This lawmaker needs support — viewers, please help,’ more than 100 million won pours in within three days. Kim Ou-joon is essentially the No. 2 figure in politics.”

In fact, Kim Ou-joon has demonstrated power even greater than that.

After the presidential election, President Lee backed Park Chan-dae as party leader, mobilizing every available organizational resource. Yet Park lost. Most sitting lawmakers supported him, but party members followed Kim Ou-joon’s signal and backed Jung Cheong-rae instead.

It was an event that clearly proved Kim was “more than a No. 2 figure.”

The fame of his YouTube channel with 2.27 million subscribers, as well as his wealth — including a building worth over 10 billion won — were all made possible by that influence.

Then the recent “prosecution withdrawal deal”controversy erupted.

The allegation is that once President Lee leaves office, the judicial procedures currently suspended will resume, and he could potentially face a guilty verdict. To eliminate that possibility in advance, a close aide of the president allegedly proposed to prosecutors that the seven indictments already filed be withdrawn — supposedly reflecting the president’s wishes.

In return, if prosecutors accepted the arrangement, they would be guaranteed supplementary investigative authority in the currently proposed legislation to establish the Central Investigation Office and revise the anti-corruption investigative framework.

When former MBC reporter Jang In-soo appeared on Kim Ou-joon’s YouTube channel and declared, “This is a fact,” presenting the alleged proposal as established truth, Kim did not attempt to verify it. Instead he praised the report, saying, “That’s big reporting. You’ve got a scoop.”

What would viewers think after seeing that? Would they not assume the alleged judicial deal was a fact?

Soon afterward, when Justice MinisterJeong Seong-howas mentioned as the high-ranking official who allegedly conveyed the president’s intent, Jeong himself appeared in the media and flatly denied it, saying he had never made such a proposal. Officials from the presidential office also came forward to insist that the claim was groundless.

At the time, President Lee’s approval ratings were surpassing 65 percent and 66 percent, continuing to set new highs.

On X (formerly Twitter), the president repeatedly wrote late at night — in carefully worded language — that granting prosecutors supplementary investigative authority in the proposed reform bill would be desirable from a human-rights perspective.

Nevertheless, hardliners such as Jung Cheong-rae, Choo Mi-ae, and Kim Yong-min pushed forward fiercely, insisting that the prosecutorial investigation power must be completely eradicated this time, charging ahead like Don Quixote’s enraged bull driven by deep resentment toward prosecutors.

Ahead of the June 3 local elections, Jung Cheong-rae suddenly declared a merger with Cho Kuk’s party, and Kim Ou-joon strongly backed it from behind the scenes. The presidential office viewed this with displeasure.

Confident in his political base, Jung attempted to force the merger, triggering a behind-the-scenes power struggle between pro-Lee factions and the presidential circle.

As the president’s approval ratings surged, Jung began to sense a disadvantage and softened his stance.

He said, “The president is not someone who would engage in dangerous judicial dealings,” and postponed the merger with Cho Kuk until after the election. At the same time, he subtly defended Kim Ou-joon’s judicial deal allegation alongside Choo Mi-ae and Kim Yong-min.

By last weekend, however, the presidential office began to intervene.

Officials were instructed not to appear on Kim Ou-joon TV anymore. Ministers, presidential secretaries, and senior aides are now effectively barred from appearing on his YouTube channel.

Hong Ik-pyo, the presidential chief of political affairs, appeared on KBS and stated:

“The prosecution withdrawal deal allegation is extremely inappropriate fake news. Since Kim Ou-joon’s News Factory is registered as a media outlet, it may well face investigation by the Korea Communications Standards Commission.”

Amid constant criticism that YouTube functions as a regulatory free zone, the Lee administration amended the Network Act rather than the Broadcasting Act last year to crack down on false reporting. It also revised the Media Arbitration Act, introducing punitive damages of up to 1 billion won if press reports are judged to be fabricated or manipulated.

Hong Ik-pyo effectively pointed the blade of this revised law directly at Kim Ou-joon’s YouTube channel as its first target.

The Democratic Party filed a complaint, and the presidential chief of political affairs explicitly urged the media watchdog to launch an investigation.

After the election, U.S. PresidentDonald Trumpfiled massive defamation lawsuits against media outlets he accused of unlawfully disparaging him. CBS paid a settlement of $16 million, ABC News $15 million, and X (Twitter) $10 million.

What fate awaits Kim Ou-joon’s YouTube channel?

An enraged Kim responded:

“Why should I apologize? How could I know that reporter Jang In-soo would say such a thing? If lawsuits are filed, I’ll counter every one of them with charges of false accusation.”

President Lee has repeatedly said, “There is no market that can defeat the government.” Kim Ou-joon is merely a market player.

At one time, backed by the enormous power of the presidency, he wielded influence greater than the old “emperor of the night” — a kind of “emperor of the dawn.”

But he chose to stand opposite that power. Some interpret it as a preliminary battle over party leadership after the election.

It brings to mind Icarus, who flew too close to the sun and watched the wax holding his wings melt away.

Will he continue to display a power that no one can challenge?
Or has he already begun a vertical fall toward a cliff whose depth no one can measure?