|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Geckoman
Joined: 07 Jun 2007
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:07 am Post subject: New York Times Full-Page Ad: Dokdo is Korea's Territory! |
 |
|
A popular Korean singer has taken out a full-page advertisement in the New York Times in an effort to educate the world that Dokdo is Korea's territory and not Japan's territory.
To read an article about it by The Korea Times see below or go to:
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2008/07/113_27378.html
And the ad actually got attention from the American press and AP did a story about it. 
Read the AP story about it by viewing below or going to:
http://news.aol.com/story/_a/ny-times-full-page-ad-claims-disputed/n20080710024009990016?ecid=RSS0001
To see an English-language website that was created to promote to the world Korea's claims, and that shows past and future ads regarding Korea's claims in major English-language newspapers, go to: www.forthenextgeneration.com
| Quote: |
The Korea Times
Popular Singer Finances Dokdo Promotion Ad in NYT
By Park Si-soo
Staff Reporter
A popular Korean singer financed a full-page advertisement on Dokdo ㅡ two tiny islets in the Ease Sea ㅡ in The New York Times to reaffirm the islets are a part of Korean territory.
The vocalist Kim Jang-hoon, 41, teamed up with a freelance Korean public relations expert Seo Kyoung-duk to publish the ad in the major American newspaper.
The advertisement, published on July 9 with the headline of ``Do You Know?,'' stated ``For the last 2,000 years, the body of water between Korean and Japan has been called the `East Sea.' Dokdo (two islands) located in the East Sea is a part of Korean territory. The Japanese government must acknowledge this fact.''
It also asked for cooperation between the two governments to pass down accurate facts of history to the next generation and realize peace and prosperity in Northeast Asia.
The publication came amid escalating tension between the two countries fueled by the Japanese government's recent attempt to add Dokdo to a part of Japanese territory in a new reference book for middle school students.
In addition, the name ``East Sea'' has also been one of the most controversial issues between the two states. The Korean government has named the body of water the ``East Sea,'' while the Japanese government has called it the ``Sea of Japan.''
``The advertisement is an act of civilian diplomacy,'' Yonhap News quoted Kim as saying. ``Civilians' unified move against U.S. beef imports made Seoul and Washington sit at a renegotiation table. I think our collective move, embodied in the ad campaign, will be a steppingstone to globally inform people that Dokdo belongs to Korea.''
Seo plans to publish similar ads in other influential newspapers next year to commemorate Korean Independence Day, which falls on Aug. 15.
``With support from Mr. Kim, Internet users and overseas Koreans, I will constantly do the ad campaign,'' Seo said.
For more information about Dokdo, please visit www.forthenextgeneration.com
[email protected]
Source: The Korea Times; July 10th, 2008; http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2008/07/113_27378.html |
| Quote: |
The AP
N.Y. Times full-page ad claims disputed islets belong to S. Korea
WASHINGTON, July 10 (Kyodo) - The New York Times on Wednesday carried a full-page ad claiming South Korea's sovereignty over a pair of South Korean-controlled rocky islets in the Sea of Japan, called Takeshima in Japan and Dokdo in South Korea.
The ad, titled "Do you know?" says, "Dokdo and East Sea (Sea of Japan). For the last 2,000 years, the body of water between Korea and Japan has been called the 'East Sea."'
"Dokdo (two islands) located in the East Sea is a part of (South) Korean territory. The Japanese government must acknowledge this fact," said the ad put up by the advertiser who is identified only as www.ForTheNextGeneration.com.
"Moreover, Korea and Japan must pass down accurate facts of history to the next generation and cooperate with each other," it says.
It also shows a map of a part of Northeast Asia depicting Japan, the Korean Peninsula, eastern China and far-east Russia.
In July 2005, the same group put up a similar full-page ad in the New York Times titled "Dokdo is Korean territory."
"Dokdo belongs to Korea. The Japanese government must face this fact. Also Korea and Japan should now move toward cooperation," it said.
Japan and South Korea have long been at odds over the ownership of Takeshima, which consists of two small uninhabited islets and numerous reefs covering a total area of 230,000 square meters.
In May, Japan's education ministry was reported to be planning to state Takeshima as an integral part of Japan in an educational document, drawing anger from South Korea.
In an interview last Sunday with Kyodo News, South Korean President Lee Myung Bak urged Japan not to follow through with the plan, saying such a move would dampen future-oriented bilateral relations.
Meanwhile, earlier this year the same advertiser put up a full-page ad in the New York Times over a dispute on the history of an ancient state, called Goguryeo, whose territory covered most of the Korean Peninsula and parts of northeastern China.
In that ad, the group insisted "Goguryeo is without a doubt a part of Korean history. The Chinese government must acknowledge this fact."
Source: The AP; July 10th, 2008; http://news.aol.com/story/_a/ny-times-full-page-ad-claims-disputed/n20080710024009990016?ecid=RSS0001 |
Last edited by Geckoman on Thu Jul 10, 2008 7:09 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
moosehead
Joined: 05 May 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
like new yorkers f*cking give a crap
they'll be like - huh? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Major Kong
Joined: 29 Oct 2007
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dokdo weighs slightly less than I do (not bad for an island) because
seafood ingestion effort, far outways the end result. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Major Kong
Joined: 29 Oct 2007
Location: South Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 11:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ooops, "weighs"... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CeleryMan
Joined: 12 Apr 2007
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 1:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wow, this tranny ajuma is the face of the middle aged Korean man! Well done Korea.. purple highlights and all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Binch Lover
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In fairness, they do present a good argument. Those big capital letters are very impressive and the strong language really convinces me. The lack of any supporting evidence doesn't diminish the power of those big capital letters.
DOKDO
IS
KOREAN
TERRITORY |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seoulsucker
Joined: 05 Mar 2006
Location: The Land of the Hesitant Cutoff
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 4:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The article was inspirational. In fact, I had a Japanese flag for breakfast this morning. 
Dear Korea,
If you really believe this, take it up with the international courts, and be prepared to stand by their decision.
Thanks,
The Rest of the World |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flakfizer
Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 5:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| seoulsucker wrote: |
The article was inspirational. In fact, I had a Japanese flag for breakfast this morning.
Dear Korea,
If you really believe this, take it up with the international courts, and be prepared to stand by their decision.
Thanks,
The Rest of the World |
Wait, there's a "rest of the world?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. Pink
Joined: 21 Oct 2003
Location: China
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Which country has troops on the island? Korea.
So if Japan were to try to physically take it over, would that mean war? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LarrytheGiraffee
Joined: 12 Feb 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I love the way the newspaper that reported on the ad still refers to the sea as the Sea of Japan and the islands as Takeshima when they arent referencing the ad. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kiarell
Joined: 29 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
THE FALKLANDS IS UK TERRITORY!!!!!!!!!
Oh wait, wrong nationalist bend over saving face for some worthless rocks in the ocean. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kprrok
Joined: 06 Apr 2004
Location: KC
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My first thought was that when Americans see that ad they're gonna think one thing....
| Quote: |
| What the hell is the EAST SEA? |
Don't these Koreans understand that no one outside of Korea calls it the East Sea? Morons. (not all Koreans, just the ones who stupidly put this ad in the paper)
KPRROK |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
it's full of stars
Joined: 26 Dec 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well at least the Falklands had somebody living on them and trying to eke out an existence.
But nevermind that. There's a kid just walked into the office and he's wearing a t-shirt that says "I love my weiner", with a pic of a sausage dog on it. Just thought I'd share. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
branchsnapper
Joined: 21 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This is off wikipedia:
There are conflicting interpretations about the state of sovereignty over the islands in pre-modern times. A Korean claim is partly based on references to a Korean islands called Usan-do (우산, 于山) in various historical records and maps. According to the Korean view, these refer to today's Liancourt Rocks, while the Japanese side argues that they must refer to a different island, today called Jukdo (죽도 竹島), a small islet located in the immediate vicinity of the nearest larger Korean island Ulleung-do.
Japan officially incorporated the islands as part of its territory in 1905, shortly before Korea became Japan`s protectorate.
The present-day conflict largely stems from conflicting interpretations of whether Japan's renunciation of sovereignty over its occupied territories after the Second World War was supposed to cover the Liancourt Rocks as well. A decision by the Supreme Command of the Allied occupation powers (SCAP), Instruction #677 of January 29, 1946, listed the Liancourt Rocks as part of those territories over which Japanese sovereignty was to be suspended, but the final peace treaty between Japan and the Allied powers, the Treaty of San Francisco, did not mention them.[citation needed]
:Does anyone know why this happened with the final peace treaty? I have read about this before, and it seems the US decided to make this change on purpose, for some reason, but I'm not sure why. Korea won't go to the international courts, despite claiming they have a fantastic case. I haven't seen a Korean explanation for that either, but I suppose that a negative ruling would be too big a disaster to contemplate, and they possess the thing anyway, and milk it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
