matthew cronkhite
963 posts
Despite being an active kpop idol, Jeno is currently pursuing a master's degree in Business.
OOAK Records has released an official statement regarding the change in the upcoming hearing between Source Music and OOAK CEO, Min Hee-Jin. 🔗m.entertain.naver.com/home/article/3…
RM of BTS will showcase nearly 150 pieces from his personal art collection at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art in October.
THE EMAIL I know that much of what has happened since April 22 is still pretty unclear to the wider Tokki community. Some of you may be fully caught up on the details, while others might only have bits and pieces of information. There's very little coverage of this situation in English, but Sports Kyunghyang published an exclusive article on May 17, 2024, written by Lee Seon-myeong, which sheds light on how the controversy started. The article includes the entire content of the whistleblowing email that ADOR CEO Min Hee-jin sent internally to HYBE’s management, demanding a response by April 23, 2024. In this email, Min pleaded with HYBE to address serious concerns about business practices affecting NewJeans. But what happened next was unexpected: on April 22, 2024—just one day before ADOR's requested deadline—an entirely different turn of events unfolded. Here’s the content of the internal email document sent by Min Hee-jin, CEO of ADOR, to HYBE management: ______________________________ To the HYBE Management, On April 3, 2024, ADOR demanded that HYBE Corporation and Belift Lab take a stance and corrective actions regarding the alleged plagiarism by ILLIT, which has harmed the brand value of NewJeans. (Please refer to the email below and the attached file.) The controversy surrounding the plagiarism by ILLIT is merely the tip of the iceberg among the issues that have arisen between NewJeans and HYBE. The legal representative for NewJeans has strongly requested ADOR to address HYBE's numerous interferences and instances of discriminatory and unfair treatment, which have become too severe to endure. In response, as the management responsible for NewJeans, ADOR, together with NewJeans' legal representative, conveys the following position. Although the previous email was sent to HYBE and Belift Lab, Belift Lab has only responded with a vague answer that they are “preparing a response,” while HYBE has yet to provide any definitive reply. Both NewJeans’ legal representative and ADOR are awaiting HYBE's response. This email, as well as the previous communication, goes beyond ADOR/NewJeans and addresses HYBE's approach to ethical management and sustainability, which is why it is directed to HYBE's executive leadership. A major issue with HYBE is its continued uncritical adoption of the entertainment industry’s detrimental practices, perpetuating unethical behavior without scrutiny. As a leading corporation in the entertainment sector, HYBE fails to fulfill its social responsibility, and its lack of transparency in corporate governance results in both direct and indirect harm to NewJeans. 1. The most egregious case is HYBE's practice of "pushing album sales." "Album pushing" refers to artificially inflating first-week album sales by placing large orders through distributors or overseas subsidiaries or hastily organizing fan events. This misleads stakeholders by creating the illusion of growth for groups that are, in reality, stagnating or by exaggerating the performance of a project. Such manipulation distorts fair market practices. The repercussions on the stock market are severe, as this doesn’t simply inflate numbers but misleads investors about the corporation’s and the entertainment industry’s growth potential. This practice deceives shareholders, employees, the capital market, and fans, undermining the entertainment industry’s ecosystem. It is extremely troubling that HYBE, as an industry leader, is exploiting regulatory loopholes to engage in this “album pushing” practice. NewJeans was approached by HYBE to participate in "album pushing." During the release of their 2nd EP, Get Up, HYBE suggested pushing an additional 100,000 copies to surpass aespa’s first-week record. However, ADOR firmly rejected this, as it contradicts ADOR’s business philosophy. ADOR rejected this proposal to protect the integrity of NewJeans' achievements and avoid devaluing the pure 1st place records NewJeans has attained so far. Furthermore, at the time when the community raised concerns about “album pushing,” NewJeans' legal representative inquired with ADOR, which confirmed that NewJeans does not engage in such practices. If the "album pushing" issue draws further public attention, NewJeans might be misinterpreted as having also inflated their achievements simply because they are part of HYBE. As NewJeans’ managing agency, ADOR is committed to preventing a scenario where NewJeans’ accomplishments and efforts, achieved without shortcuts, are tainted by association. Even though NewJeans has already attained impressive sales without “album pushing,” they risk not being fully recognized for this value. Most importantly, the belief that success can be achieved solely through music, performance, and content is threatened. This perception spreads the harmful notion that “not engaging in such practices is foolish.” If even a high-selling group like NewJeans was encouraged to surpass other groups’ records through pushing, one wonders what other groups may have experienced. This reflects HYBE’s lack of ethical awareness. ADOR urges HYBE to stop its hypocritical behavior—claiming to oppose industry ills while perpetuating them—and to make prompt corrections. While this practice is reportedly widespread within HYBE labels, we request a thorough investigation into any back-orders or transactions that could be interpreted as "album pushing" and expect strict transparency and accountability. 2. HYBE restricts competition by limiting opportunities for labels to select the best partners in areas other than production, such as distribution, business, and management. Recently, HYBE entered a ten-year exclusive distribution contract with UMG for albums and digital music. This arrangement hinders NewJeans' future endeavors. Although this contract is purported to lower distribution fees in the short term, requiring an artist like NewJeans, which is rapidly growing, to be tied to a single label for such a prolonged period is unreasonable. Instead, it would be logical to encourage competition among providers through shorter contracts to secure the best possible terms, but this agreement with UMG fundamentally restricts NewJeans from exploring better options. Furthermore, despite potentially reduced distribution fees, ADOR still incurs substantial additional internal fees to HYBE, making this arrangement similar to “robbing Peter to pay Paul.” This long-term financial burden imposed on NewJeans for the next decade is entirely unreasonable. The issue goes beyond this. Another critical problem is that the services provided by UMG-affiliated labels are often subpar, and satisfaction is low. This discontent is shared by all HYBE labels, not only ADOR. Thus, for the next ten years, this contract compels us to work with UMG-affiliated labels, regardless of service quality. Such a long-term arrangement ultimately disincentivizes these labels from improving their services and hampers ADOR/NewJeans' competitiveness in international markets. In short, HYBE’s long-term contract with UMG places NewJeans at a disadvantage, and it is unfair that the associated risks must be borne entirely by ADOR and the artist. During negotiations with UMG, NewJeans could have been a valuable asset for HYBE in securing favorable terms. However, it is unclear what benefits NewJeans received from HYBE in return. 3. One major issue is that HYBE is not prioritizing the improvement and advancement of its core label operations. HYBE currently pushes its labels to conduct various business activities such as concerts, merchandise, advertising, and music distribution through the agency, regardless of the capacity or quality of the HYBE business organization or services. However, from a label’s perspective, whether the business partner is internal or external is less important than their business capabilities. ADOR has experienced multiple instances where HYBE’s performance fell short of its expectations. To achieve better outcomes, ADOR had to secure its resources for concerts, advertising, and merchandise or seek external partners. However, even disentangling from existing internal relationships wasn’t easy. For example, in the advertising business, NewJeans has consistently attracted significant interest, making it easy to manage incoming advertisers without active outreach. However, due to issues created by the Brand Synergy Team handling advertising, there were frequent disputes with both advertisers and the label. ADOR raised these issues repeatedly, but they went unresolved until a major incident occurred. Conflicts of interest surfaced when negotiating with a luxury brand for NewJeans while arranging a new deal for LE SSERAFIM. It was discovered that the Brand Synergy Team had provided different and misleading information to ADOR and the brand. The Brand Synergy Team should handle all labels equally, yet they showed bias toward specific artists. Only after this favoritism was revealed did they agree to ADOR’s request to return three months’ agency fees to close the contract. During this process, ADOR had to engage in time-consuming tasks, like meeting with the brand to uncover the truth and clarify matters, which was an unnecessary burden for the label. Even though ADOR paid the same commission rate as external partners and had clear grounds for contract termination, the process was complicated because the business partner was an internal team within HYBE. After termination, ADOR even faced unfounded rumors within the company of being a “difficult” label. Even when adhering to procedures to secure external partners for competitive performances or merchandise, ADOR encountered passive resistance, as though external transactions were violations of internal HYBE regulations. If HYBE perceives its internal resources as lacking, then enhancing the competitiveness of its business units should be a priority. However, instead of focusing on this, HYBE manages label performance metrics in ways that emphasize HYBE's overall scale. Management issues that distract from HYBE’s core business have also become evident in its new subsidiaries. HYBE acquired Ithaca Holdings in 2021 for a staggering sum but has yet to see meaningful results from its global business. Investments in platforms, games, AI, and blockchain have also yielded minimal returns. According to the 2023 business report, the results for its new businesses, including HYBE America (-142.4 billion KRW), HYBE UMG LLC (-23.4 billion KRW), Weverse (-4.4 billion KRW), HYBE IM (-20.9 billion KRW), Supertone (-6.7 billion KRW), and Binary Korea (-3.8 billion KRW), all recorded significant losses. Despite ongoing losses in non-core businesses, HYBE’s 2023 performance report prioritized offsetting these poor results. The foundation of the entertainment business lies in nurturing and managing artists through labels. In 2023, NewJeans achieved unprecedented success in under two years, setting a new milestone in the entertainment industry. However, this overwhelming growth was notably absent from IR and press releases. Instead, an instance of editing a biased IR script was noted. Why does this often happen only with NewJeans? 4. HYBE’s Shared Services supporting ADOR/NewJeans urgently needs improvement. As emphasized, the core of the entertainment business lies in label operations, and HYBE should focus on helping labels thrive. Currently, HYBE’s Shared Services lacks an understanding of the multi-label system. Shared Services under this structure should not simply act as a support organization that performs common tasks in a top-down, military-style manner. ADOR pays a service fee to HYBE annually, equivalent to ADOR’s entire personnel costs, for services like legal, HR, finance, PR, and IT. Yet, HYBE’s support has been unsatisfactory relative to the high fees, with insufficient effort to support rapidly growing businesses or improve production and operations. Support should be tailored to each label and artist, considering their unique conditions and growth trajectories. However, as seen in previous examples, HYBE has failed to maintain a balanced approach between HYBE and the labels or among the labels themselves. From the moment NewJeans debuted, their success was evident. However, HYBE’s PR approach has been lukewarm, even though simply promoting their achievements would suffice. Numerous objections have been raised against this indifferent PR approach, yet it persisted in IR/PR scripts. Foreign and domestic journalists even contacted ADOR directly, noticing HYBE PR’s lackluster support for NewJeans compared to other HYBE artists. Additionally, the weekly “Industry Trends Review” by Kang Myung-seok, editor of Weverse Magazine, often contains biased content. ADOR has requested objective data, like metrics, and minimum objectivity, but even after raising these concerns with CEO Park Ji-won, who suggested to “just ignore it,” and with CHRO Kim Joo-young, who responded that it was “just a personal opinion,” the biased information continued to be circulated among executives. One might wonder why personal opinions, lacking objectivity, are being distributed as if representative of the company, creating suspicions that these materials may be propagandistic in nature. It’s concerning that the opinions of one person, who may not fully understand the entertainment industry, could influence others within HYBE with limited industry experience. It has been reported that the recent review on the plagiarism controversy surrounding ILLIT selectively highlighted only favorable reactions while ignoring the negative ones, a continued pattern of self-serving narratives. ADOR had previously requested to unsubscribe from these reviews but learned from others who received them that they, too, felt similarly dissatisfied. Recently, NewJeans announced their first concert in Tokyo Dome, an unprecedented achievement. However, HYBE coincidentally released a press release at the same time about a UMG distribution agreement, framing it as positive news. In response, NewJeans’ legal representative inquired: “Isn’t HYBE PR able to control and manage all press releases? If the UMG deal is good news, wouldn’t it have made sense to separate it from the NewJeans announcement to maximize positive coverage? It seems like HYBE would benefit from focusing on NewJeans’ comeback and Tokyo Dome announcement. Why did HYBE intentionally schedule the UMG contract announcement simultaneously, prioritizing its promotion?” Even if the dates coincided by chance, HYBE PR’s role should be to coordinate news to maximize mutual benefits. Particularly, considering ILLIT’s promotion as “HYBE’s youngest daughter” despite being an entirely separate team with older members, it’s clear that HYBE shows a contrasting, preferential treatment toward ILLIT. When asked about ILLIT’s plagiarism controversy, the CCO responded, “While there were plagiarism allegations pre-debut, they seemed to subside after the official release of the performances and music.” It is widely acknowledged that there were plagiarism accusations. Regardless of the validity, there remains a label that suffered unnecessary noise due to this issue. What’s troubling is that even HYBE’s high-level executives overseeing PR felt comfortable communicating their bias towards specific labels to those who had experienced the fallout. HYBE should first recognize the basic fact that “the mere occurrence of a plagiarism dispute and the resulting issue itself is a problem,” and acknowledge that there are parties “who suffered from it.” 5. What are HYBE’s Principles of Business Ethics? NewJeans’ legal representative and ADOR ask HYBE. Does HYBE’s principle, established to combat long-standing issues in the entertainment industry, allow it to freely take from its subsidiaries only when it benefits itself, emphasizing unity only when convenient, associating them in marketing without consent, and maintaining a brazen attitude that ignores the actual issues? If HYBE was confident in its music, why did it need to mimic NewJeans’ concept, choreography, and leverage their popularity? Why couldn’t it stand on its own creative work? How could results obtained this way bring any satisfaction? The term "NewJeans Syndrome" emerged due to their massive success, which transformed K-pop trends, shifting the dominant style from girl-crush to what’s now known as “NewJeans style” easy-listening music. This transformation boosted HYBE’s corporate image and stock price, presenting it as a leader in the industry with multi-label success. NewJeans’ influence has shaped the style of nearly every rookie group that debuted afterward, yet HYBE has heavily ridden this trend to a point that raises concerns. Why does HYBE, instead of protecting ADOR/NewJeans, disrupt their activities and create hindrances? People and organizations who had no role in NewJeans’ creative identity freely use it as if it’s public property, treating it like a common asset and tarnishing the image ADOR built with care. HYBE not only used NewJeans—the most prominent and popular group—to raise visibility for ILLIT, comparing and contrasting the two groups to generate mentions and buzz, depleting NewJeans’ image but also, with audacity, used this backlash to their advantage, harming NewJeans’ reputation. This incident demonstrates HYBE’s lack of basic understanding and respect toward artists, both RM and its own creators. It is disappointing that such issues have arisen from the parent company itself, and we ask how ADOR/NewJeans can be compensated for the damages they have suffered. NewJeans’ legal representatives and ADOR call for HYBE to take responsibility for unnecessarily exploiting NewJeans and to make realistic corrections as described in this letter. Additionally, we request a comprehensive overhaul of ILLIT’s marketing and concept direction. Was Chairman Bang Si-hyuk’s intent, when he extended a recruitment offer to Min Hee-jin in 2019 as an admirer of her work, rooted in the expectation that her creative works could be easily appropriated and utilized? Even before LE SSERAFIM’s debut, the unilateral change and notification of HYBE’s first girl group plans was disrespectful and irresponsible. And, right up to LE SSERAFIM’s debut, CEO Park Ji-won implored Min Hee-jin not to promote her own “Min Hee-jin girl group,” a conversation still on record and known to have been on Chairman Bang’s orders. With the illogical reasoning that the team Min Hee-jin was preparing would be “too clearly defined” if its rookie status was revealed, they requested the discontinuation of NewJeans’ promotion. HYBE has not changed since that unreasonable and incomprehensible request. While HYBE promotes its multi-label system externally as a rational business model, looking back at ADOR’s formation reveals the truth. Min Hee-jin was notified unilaterally by HYBE of changes to debut plans, with LE SSERAFIM positioned as HYBE’s first girl group while the trainees, who would later form NewJeans, were assigned as the next team for Source Music. Having broken its promise first and altered the debut timing unilaterally, HYBE should have sought understanding or proactively suggested the creation of a separate label, rather than relegating the trainee team (that included current NewJeans members) to Source Music’s next group. Despite using Min Hee-jin to publicly announce HYBE’s first girl group and signing trainees based on that promotion, HYBE easily discarded its promise, leaving Min Hee-jin and current ADOR employees feeling deeply disillusioned and wanting to resign. But we did not want to be seen as irresponsible by the public and the trainees who remained, so we stayed out of a sense of responsibility. We explained our intentions to CEO Park Ji-won at the time and proposed the idea of creating ADOR to plan a separate debut. Was the establishment of ADOR a straightforward and smooth process? Reflecting on these past events, it seems evident that Chairman Bang is surrounded by individuals who do not offer candid advice and even report industry trends with bias. Since the unreasonable requests from three years ago have continued, leading to the present issue, we are addressing it firmly this time. Not only ILLIT but also LE SSERAFIM has faced relentless plagiarism disputes over the concept and songs from each of their three releases. We have received reports from overseas producers and associates working with ADOR that LE SSERAFIM’s songs are under negotiation with HYBE over plagiarism costs. This moment calls for reflection and improvement more urgently than ever. We heard news that HYBE may soon be designated as a conglomerate group. HYBE should refrain from emulating the negative aspects of large corporations and seek ways to implement ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) management in line with its status. HYBE should also, now more than ever, take responsibility for its widely promoted multi-label system, setting realistic and forward-looking goals for improvement. We trust Chairman Bang’s words that if confronted with irrational or unfair practices, we should speak up and work toward correction. Please do not apply outdated logic like “the parent company’s success ultimately benefits the subsidiary” or “the ends justify the means” to K-pop, a global leader in entertainment and cultural arts. Such thinking rationalizes obsolete practices like “military football,” which focuses on favoritism toward certain individuals or organizations, ultimately slowing down and disrupting the organization, and further, devastating the entire entertainment industry. If the multi-label system was created to promote diversity and risk distribution, then make it different. Foster a healthy business environment. There’s no need to discuss respect for creators. Even for shareholders’ rights and interests, it is not logical for a creativity-based company to produce copycats. Business-wise, this is a shortsighted act that ultimately leads to loss. In his online town hall message to employees during HYBE’s IPO, Chairman Bang made a statement: “My core philosophy in business management remains unchanged: to contribute to a better world by resolving issues rooted in common sense.” “It will be an opportunity to enhance the integrity and transparency of the company’s management and achieve management modernization.” Now more than ever, HYBE appears to need ethical management in every aspect—creativity and business. As Chairman Bang stated, make efforts to address the current issues. We hope for a reasonable, sound, and transparent HYBE. Please respond to the contents of this letter by April 23, 2024. ______________________________ Read the original article in Korean: m.entertain.naver.com/article/144/00…
‘GREENGREEN’ by CORTIS has now surpassed 1 million pre-saves on Spotify's Album Countdown chart.
JENNIE is now verified by Spotify as not using AI in her music. Artists who receive this badge are verified as authentic artists, no AI involved in their music and has a consistent listener activity & engagement.
BTS performs ‘IDOL’ at the opening night of their ARIRANG world tour.
#HYBE is severely affected by false rumours targeting #BTS, including fake streaming data and misleading claims about member Jin. The company warns this misinformation risks misleading fans and investors and is considering legal action. + #DS_BTS
오늘 오전, 하이브 주가가 14% 급락했습니다. BTS 공연 직전까지 52주 고점(36만7,500원)을 찍었던 주가가 공연 이후 무너지고 있습니다. BTS 컴백 당일인 지난 20일, 하이브는 금융감독원에 337쪽짜리 사업보고서를 공시했습니다. 뉴탐사가 이 문서를 분석했습니다. 2021년 1조2,000억원에 인수한 미국 이타카 홀딩스가 속한 HYBE America는 2025년 한 해 3,231억원의 순손실을 기록했습니다. 그런데 이타카 영업권 8,234억원은 고작 2.4%만 깎았습니다. BTS 빅히트뮤직, 세븐틴 플레디스, 뉴진스 어도어 등 한국 레이블 6곳은 전부 영구성장률 1.0%를 적용하면서, 적자인 이타카에만 2.5%를 적용한 결과입니다. 이 숫자를 0.5%포인트만 내려도 398억원의 추가 손상이 발생합니다. 뉴탐사가 앞서 보도한 태그PR의 보유 지분 전체를 처분한 사실, 스쿠터 브라운에게 신임 대표보다 6배 많은 스톡옵션(잠재 이익 137억원)을 부여한 사실도 사업보고서에서 확인됩니다. 민희진 소송 1심 패소로 293억원을 공탁한 사실, 방시혁 의장이 급여 0원에 배당 66억원을 받는 구조도 마찬가지입니다. 언론이 BTS 컴백에 집중하는 사이 337쪽이 말하는 진실을 뉴탐사가 기록했습니다. 자세한 내용은 기사를 확인해주세요. 👉 newtamsa.org/news/7WsGrQ
