Criticisms regarding Korea’s notorious Shutdown Law have been inflamed by the changes in Minecraft’s account system, a game rated suitable for children over the age of 10. With the denial in access to the popular game, an online petition against the law has garnered over 100,000 signatures. Established in 2011, the law was a rather sad attempt to curb the nation’s high Internet addiction rates, setting a curfew on game time. It is understandable why the law has been met with widespread backlash, as it hardly gets to the root of the problem and is implemented on rather arbitrary lines.
The Youth Protection Revision Act, otherwise known as the Shutdown Law or the Cinderella Law, prohibits children under the age of 16 from playing online PC games from 12:00 A.M. to 6:00 A.M. This curfew was brought about by the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family out of concerns that children were sleeping less due to such games. In addition to the curfew, the ministry has restricted all games from companies such as X-box Live or PlayStation Network to those who are 19 years-old and older.
10 years ago, the response to the law was heavily antagonistic, with many questioning why only the gaming sector was regulated in the face of Internet addiction. That sentiment still holds today, with many now pushing for the abolition of the law due to the most recent controversy involving Minecraft. As of this year, the game requires users to sign in through their Xbox Live accounts. This account system change, of course, means that Korean players under the age of 19 are excluded from the game (despite meeting the age requirements), which has exacerbated opposition to the law.
With such inconsistencies within the Cinderella Law, the only way forward for the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family does indeed seem to be the abolition of the law, starting off a clean slate. Though borne out of good intentions, the Shutdown Law only targets online games—not console games or mobile phone games. This limited scope appears discriminatory to the public and can only lead to a slippery slope of more bans, as exemplified in how the ministry tried to expand the law to include mobile games but failed to get enough support.
More than this, however, the Shutdown Law does not seem to tackle the nation’s problem of Internet addiction in any sort of meaningful way. Just because games are not allowed to be played during a designated time does not necessarily mean that gaming time will decrease—children can still play during the day. Indeed, they have adapted to the law, finding loopholes. According to The Korea Herald, they have used their parents’ accounts to sign in and get past age restrictions, which simply goes to show the ineffectiveness of such a law.
Thus, the government must turn to alternatives, instead of resorting to bans. While Internet addiction is most commonly seen in young individuals aged 14 and below, it impacts all nonetheless. In this way, the government should create policies with a broader scope and target, including Internet service providers in monitoring such policies in the future.
According to Professor Rando Kim (Professor of Consumer Studies, Seoul National University), change begins in the classroom. Consumer education programs should be offered to teach students about appropriate internet usage. Teenagers, for example, turn to the web to combat feelings of loneliness and isolation. Thus, educational programs that teach that such sources only further those feelings and inform students of the alternatives would be beneficial in tackling Internet addiction.
Therefore, as this controversy has exposed, the Shutdown Law can be rather unfair, unproductive, and contradictory, which is why it must be shut down. Indeed, moving forward, the government must implement laws with due consideration, instead of drafting them up hastily. Only then shall Korea see meaningful changes in its Internet addiction rates, promoting healthier Internet-surfing habits.