They were hailed as the "new miracle of K-pop." Undoubtedly, they were a record-breaking rookie group, and the global music market eagerly took notice. The girl group FIFTY FIFTY, who debuted last November, entered the US Billboard 'Hot 100' chart with their new song 'Cupid' in February, becoming the fastest Korean artist to achieve this feat in just 130 days after debut.

Great things were expected from FIFTY FIFTY. They even sang the title track for the Hollywood movie 'Barbie', which featured global pop stars. But the sweet scent of their success turned sour in just four months. Members of FIFTY FIFTY revealed conflicts with their agency, Attract, over exclusive contract issues, putting a halt to their activities. In June, the members filed for an injunction to suspend their exclusive contract with Attract. In response, Attract raised suspicions of 'tampering' (contacting another company before the end of an existing contract) and pointed fingers at a third-party production company, The Givers. The court sought a settlement between FIFTY FIFTY and Attract but only confirmed their stark differences.

The 'tampering' issue isn't unique to FIFTY FIFTY. The South Korean entertainment industry has seen countless agencies and artists suffer from contract disputes. So, how do they view the 'FIFTY FIFTY crisis'? Star News conducted a survey of 31 entertainment management and production company representatives on the FIFTY FIFTY 'tampering' situation. The 31 respondents critically evaluated the current situation through multiple questions.

Primary Cause of the 'Tampering' Crisis? "Instigation by those around them"

20 out of 31 respondents identified the "instigation by those around them" as the fundamental reason for tampering. They pointed out that when artists, who may not yet fully understand the entertainment industry, achieve significant fame, they can be swayed by irresponsible advice and unethical temptations from their surroundings. Such influences can cloud their judgment, especially when tempting offers are presented.

One management executive, who had experienced a 'tampering' issue, explained, "Usually, when artists achieve a certain level of success, they become dissatisfied with their earnings. This is because they initially signed contracts as rookies, which might not have the best terms. They feel the company is taking advantage of them." They added, "The company bears the initial investment costs, but the artists feel they're paying off the debt with their earnings. Many are influenced by outsiders suggesting they'd get better terms elsewhere."

They continued, "Looking at the evidence presented in lawsuits, the reasons like 'breakdown of trust', 'lack of transparency in settlements', and 'forced scheduling' often seem identical, as if written by the same lawyer."

JYP Entertainment's representative, Jung Wook, pointed out, "Many debut at a young age, and those around them aren't always professionals." WM Entertainment's Vice President, Lim Seung Chae, said, "Smaller companies often lack resources and have many vulnerabilities. As they succeed, their efforts and sacrifices aren't recognized, and external forces or personal greed lead to disputes. It's heartbreaking to see such situations unfold."

14 respondents chose 'individual greed' as the main cause. They believe that while outsiders might push an individual towards tampering, the final decision rests with the individual, making their greed the primary reason. One entertainment representative commented, "Artists and agencies base their contracts on trust. The artist who first breaks this trust is the cause of tampering." They added, "It seems they've shown the public an act of betrayal, which Koreans deeply dislike. This will make their activities challenging."

Some experts (5 in total) pointed to "internal company system issues." Other opinions included exploiting the weak legal system that allows for tampering, artists thinking their success is solely due to their efforts and not the company's support, and the complexity of the entire situation.

Who Should Bear the Responsibility for the FIFTY FIFTY Crisis?

Regarding who should bear the brunt of the responsibility for the massive fallout from the tampering attempt, a majority (21 out of 31) pointed at the 'agency that proposed the tampering'. They emphasized the need for clear boundaries and mutual respect. Introducing the disruptive 'tampering' itself indicates a lack of professional ethics in the industry.

One entertainment representative passionately stated, "Launching an idol group requires immense effort and significant costs. The final product is the result of the passion, love, and sweat of the agency, artists, and numerous staff. How much would a third party, who knows nothing of this narrative, understand their sacrifices? Can they match the passion and investment? You can't buy that kind of dedication with money."

Additionally, a significant number (13 votes) believed the 'artist's family and acquaintances' also bear responsibility. Given that many idol singers are minors or lack societal experience, their families or acquaintances' opinions heavily influence them.

Yoo Hyung Seok, the head of Yoo Bon Company, remarked, "I believe there's no definitive way to prevent 'tampering' attempts. When tampering occurs, the families of artists, who are tempted by sweet offers and desire to part with their original agency without proper negotiations or adjustments, are the biggest problem." Other high-ranking agency officials echoed this sentiment, emphasizing the lack of understanding from the artists' families and acquaintances about the company's systems and financial aspects.

Other opinions included 9 experts who believed the 'artist' should bear responsibility since they make the final decisions, 1 who blamed the 'agency the artist belongs to', and others who believed everyone involved was at fault.

The Real Victims of the Tampering Crisis: From Naive Parents to Financial Losses

The majority believed that Attract, FIFTY FIFTY's agency, was the most significant victim of the crisis. 25 out of 31 respondents pointed to 'the agency the artist belongs to'. The financial loss from the investment in FIFTY FIFTY falls squarely on Attract. The company's internal morale has likely suffered, and being a smaller agency, the legal fees could be overwhelming.

Most entertainment representatives expressed concerns not only about financial losses but also about the negative image now associated with the agency. They emphasized the collective efforts and investments made by the agency to promote the artist. They lamented the lost opportunities and potential growth due to the artist's sudden and unexpected actions.

10 experts felt the 'artist' was the victim, expressing sympathy but also hinting at their own doing. Comments ranged from the tragedy of young talents losing their chance to shine, to the public's negative perception of them as ungrateful, to the artists ruining their lives due to naive parents or acquaintances.

Other opinions included 7 experts who believed the 'fans' were the victims, as they had emotionally invested in the artist, and 4 who believed the 'agency that proposed the tampering' was the victim, as they were now embroiled in a scandal.

FIFTY FIFTY's Future: A Bleak Outlook

The future of FIFTY FIFTY, who had a meteoric rise but now faces a crisis, looks uncertain. 16 out of 31 respondents believed FIFTY FIFTY would not be able to resume their activities due to their tarnished image. Even if they reconcile with Attract, the public's trust has been significantly damaged, making a comeback difficult.

15 experts believed they might resume activities, but a full recovery of their image was unlikely. They pointed out that while the public might forget the incident over time, the scar would remain. Only one respondent was optimistic about an immediate return, especially in international markets.

Copyright © 2023 Kpop Reporter. All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.