The recent legal battle involving actor Kim Soo-hyun and a Seoul retailer has sparked discussions beyond celebrity gossip, revealing how public outrage fuels the digital age’s attention economy. A ₩2.8 billion lawsuit over “brand dilution” has become a case study in how scandals are amplified for profit.
The Scandal and Its Rapid Spread
In March 2025, a YouTube stream allegedly showed Kim Soo-hyun dating late actress Kim Sae-ron while she was a minor. Though unverified, the rumor spread quickly. Brands cut ties, and a drama series reportedly edited out scenes featuring Kim. The lawsuit claims his scandals damaged the retailer’s reputation.
“Outrage is no longer a by-product of scandal; it is the product.”
Social media platforms thrive on viral anger. Studies show that outrage triggers dopamine spikes, making users crave more. This cycle benefits platforms and advertisers, who monitor public sentiment closely.
How Brands and Social Media Profit from Outrage
The lawsuit cites “morals clauses,” but the real issue is algorithmic. Negative trends on Naver or TikTok can hurt ad revenue, pushing brands to take legal action. However, history shows this often backfires.
In 2010, Samsung dropped rapper Tablo over false rumors, only to see its own reputation suffer more. Legal battles extend scandals, feeding the outrage cycle further.
A Global Pattern, Not Just a K-Drama
This isn’t unique to Korea. Similar cases include Kevin Hart losing an Oscars hosting gig and Johnny Depp’s legal battles. Outrage drives clicks, and brands react out of fear, not ethics.
“An anger feed gives the illusion of moral superiority without the work of moral reasoning.”
A Science study found that group disgust can be triggered with little evidence, yet people later remember the outrage, not the facts. This fuels misinformation.
Breaking the Outrage Addiction
Experts suggest:
Avoid sharing unverified claims.
Ask who profits from viral outrage.
Limit social media use to short, intentional sessions.
