The FTC seems to think of screen quotas as something close to an unfair trade practice. Has it ever looked at the monopoly and high-handedness of the American film industry in the global market? American movies have scorched the terrain for other nations' movies, not just because of the competitiveness American films enjoy for being produced with massive amounts of capital but through monopolistic distribution networks. If the FTC can't guarantee truly fair competition in the face of that monopoly and high-handedness it should at least not be going against its mission and going on about the need to reduce or abolish screen quotas for fear of trade friction with the US.

You're just left dumbfounded when you get to the part where the FTC claims screen quotas lead to the production of "low-quality domestic films." The remarkable development of Korean film is considered an exceptional miracle in the global film climate, parched as it is at the hands of American film. Korean movies attract over 50 percent of domestic moviegoers, and they're advancing overseas as part of the "Korean wave." The finest of Korean films have been winning awards at international competitions, a form of praise for success that is exceptional. It would seem only the FTC is unaware of how the reasons Korean film has emerged as a competitive cultural product are the significantly wider freedom of expression and screen quotas. Screen quotas are often seen as exceptional measures for protecting one's culture, but they really should be seen as self-defensive means of preventing even more seriously unfair trade.

The Hankyoreh, 19 October 2004.

[Translations by Seoul Selection (PMS)]