Allegations that MBC’s variety show “I Live Alone” prearranged and staged broadcaster Jun Hyun-moo’s “impromptu” trip to Kazakhstan were taken up at the parliamentary audit on the 22nd. Criticism that it “deceived the public” was raised at the session.

At the National Assembly Science, ICT, Broadcasting and Communications Committee audit that day, Rep. Kim Nam-kuk of the Democratic Party of Korea asked Kang Hyung-chul, chairman of the Foundation for Broadcast Culture, “Do you like reality variety shows? The reason many people like them is that they can watch unscripted, unvarnished stories through observation cameras. But if a show people thought was a reality variety show turns out to have been staged, is that deceiving the public or not?”

Kang answered the question, “I think a reality program should truly be ‘real,’ and if it is not, it loses trust.”

In its Aug. 14 broadcast, “I Live Alone” aired a scene in which Jun picks a destination on the spot at the airport, then flies to Almaty, Kazakhstan, and tours the city. After the broadcast, allegations arose that a pre-arranged schedule had been dressed up as spontaneous. The production team, however, denied this, saying, “No.”

The controversy flared again on the 16th, when materials that Incheon International Airport Corp. submitted to the office of Rep. Kim Eun-hye of the People Power Party, a member of the National Assembly Land, Infrastructure and Transport Committee, were reported. The scenario MBC prepared described a flow in which Jun says, ‘I’ve been to China too many times~ shall we try Kazakhstan~’ and then calls actors Koo Sung-hwan and Lee Joo-seung to settle on going to Kazakhstan.

Kim criticized MBC’s attitude, saying, “If a staged fiction, a scripted show, was billed as if it were a reality variety show, that is deceiving and misleading the public. It is directly tied to trust in broadcasting because it lied to the public about the most important core point the program claimed to be.”

Kim pointed out, “(MBC) deceived the public once more in the process of explaining,” adding, “It gave a false explanation and only explained again later when the official document and the preparations came to light.” He added, “This should not happen.”

“This should be an occasion to review the deliberation process and the transparency of the explanation process that became a problem this time, so that similar cases do not recur,” Kang said.