North Korea Watchers and insight peddlers
When the goal shifts from fostering understanding to maximizing transactions, the essence of insight is lost.
In the world of the North Korea Watcher, there is an abundance of variety. One particularly interesting group is the insight peddler - the consultancy services that seek to sell their wares. Of these, there are five broad groups who, just like itinerant peddlers of old, can be categorized according to the wares they’re selling - in this case, the level of analysis undertaken.
It’s just the news
At the most basic level, analysis involves summarizing or repeating headlines from mainstream media outlets. In the context of North Korea, this might mean echoing reports from major news agencies like Reuters or Yonhap News on events such as a missile test. For example, a report might simply state, “North Korea launched a ballistic missile into the East Sea,” without offering any additional context or interpretation.
On the positive side, these providers are useful for quick updates on breaking news, and provide reports that are easily accessible and straightforward for general audiences. On the negative side, their reports lack depth or context, and can leave the audience with unanswered questions. Inevitably, they also inherently reflect the biases and omissions contained in their mainstream media sources.
It’s news, but not like you know it
The second level expands on mainstream reporting by incorporating information from specialized sources, such as think tanks, academic journals, or niche publications focusing on North Korea. These peddlers provide deeper details. For instance, while mainstream media might report a missile launch, specialized outlets would analyze the type of missile, its range, and its technical specifications. With a degree of linguistic and cultural competence, they can offer a richer understanding of events but still avoid contextual or interpretive analysis. Essentially, their greatest strength comes in their non-mainstream sources, whether it is KCNA, South Korean Government, or U.N. reports - it adds credibility and insight by providing greater research depth.
On the positive side, they enrich understanding with technical or niche details, such as missile specifications or sanctions impacts. They expand the range of information available to readers. On the negative side, they risk amplifying biases from specialized outlets with specific editorial focuses, and still lack broader contextualization or strategic insights.
Yay! Analysis!
The third level integrates mainstream and specialized reporting with contextual knowledge, explaining the “why” behind events. Analysts might frame North Korea’s missile tests within the context of its diplomatic strategy, historical behavior, and domestic political needs. For example, an analysis could explain that missile launches often coincide with South Korea-U.S. military drills, serving as a signal of Pyongyang’s displeasure while rallying domestic support by emphasizing strength against external threats. The greater the contextual reasoning, the more they can rationalize an argument for the event at hand.
On the positive side, this offers a more nuanced understanding of North Korea’s actions and motivations and helps readers connect current events to historical patterns, such as North Korea's cycle of provocations and negotiations. However, on the negative side, this approach risks overgeneralization if contextual knowledge is incomplete and can lead to situations where authors overlook ground-level realities due to reliance on secondary sources.
On-the-ground insight
At the fourth level, analysis incorporates firsthand accounts and observations, offering a view from the ground. Given North Korea's closed-off nature, direct access is rare, but valuable insights can still be gained from defectors, diplomats, or organizations working in the region. For example, interviews with defectors could shed light on how sanctions affect ordinary North Koreans, while NGOs might report on conditions at the China-North Korea border. Similarly, on-the-ground insight regarding events inside the foreign ministries and diplomatic corps in Seoul, Tokyo or Washington can provide critical context that challenges or validates broader narratives.
On the positive side, this adds human dimensions to analysis and validates or challenges trends reported by mainstream and specialized sources. However, on the negative side, securing reliable firsthand data is difficult on tightly controlled security issues whether it is in Washington or Pyongyang - and even these on-the-ground sources may have subjective, manipulative, or incomplete perspectives.
Specialized knowledge
The fifth and most advanced level delivers highly specialized, actionable insights tailored to specific audiences. Analysts combine information from all previous levels with deep expertise in policy and implementation. For instance, a report for policymakers might analyze how North Korea’s evolving nuclear strategy impacts U.S. extended deterrence in East Asia, offering recommendations for future negotiations. Alternatively, a tailored analysis for humanitarian organizations might evaluate how sanctions exemptions for aid affect food distribution within the country.
On the positive side, this provides practical, customized insights, such as strategies for engaging North Korea in diplomatic talks or mitigating humanitarian crises and offers detailed guidance for navigating complex policy or security challenges. They also often adhere to intelligence and diplomatic community analytical best practice, using standardized formats, structures and wording common to assesment and intelligence products. On the negative side, it requires significant expertise and resources, making it less accessible to general audiences, and complexity may limit broader understanding outside specialist circles. Further, assesment and intelligence products are boring. They are specifically designed to avoid the sensationalist crap that that really sells the North Korea merchandise, making them dry reading for all but a specialist audience.
The insight peddler who sells more is in sales, not insight
Lastly, it’s important to recognize that the insight peddler who prioritizes volume over value is fundamentally a salesperson, not a true purveyor of insight. Insight demands depth, rigor, and the courage to challenge assumptions, often requiring a tailored approach. Selling in quantity dilutes quality, reducing ideas to consumable soundbites aimed at appeasing rather than enlightening. True insight disrupts, provokes thought, and provides clarity amidst complexity—outcomes rarely achieved through mass appeal. All companies have an agenda - a profit agenda. When this profit agenda dilutes and weakens analysis, they become all but useless. When the goal shifts from fostering understanding to maximizing transactions, the essence of insight is lost. The peddler becomes a merchant, trading profundity for popularity, driven by metrics of sales rather than meaningful impact.
