Seunghan's Riize exit highlights K-pop's jarring value systems

Artiste agencies have to navigate contrasting fan expectations, from those who expect a dating ban on their idols to those who see it as a violation of personal freedom

- Jan Lee

On Oct 11, more than 1,000 funeral wreaths were sent to the Seoul headquarters of K-pop agency SM Entertainment. They were meant to protest the return of Seunghan to the boy band Riize, after a nearly year-long suspension just two months after his September 2023 debut.

The wreaths were filled with messages addressed to the very-much-alive 21-year-old, demanding that he permanently leave the group.

It worked. Just two days after announcing Seunghan's return, SM Entertainment reneged on the decision and the singer confirmed that he would depart, turning the septet into a sextet.

Seeing such vitriol, one would imagine that Seunghan had done something utterly reprehensible, like killing a puppy.

Instead, it was because photos of him kissing a woman in bed (both appeared fully clothed) prior to his debut and a video of him allegedly engaging in underage smoking were leaked in August and November 2023 respectively, clearly without his consent.

As someone who has to monitor English and Chinese social media frequently for work, the reactions to Seunghan's exit caused a bit of whiplash for me. While there were opinions that ran the gamut, many fans were cheering on platforms such as Xiaohongshu and Weibo, with messages like "we won", "serves him right" and "idols aren't supposed to date".

On sites like X and TikTok, where Anglophone users dwell, K-pop fans were devastated and horrified. Many were in disbelief at how Seunghan was publicly bullied out of Riize for doing what many young people do—date, smoke, live a life.

The Seunghan controversy is hardly the only incident that has split the K-pop community.

In October, BTS' Suga was also the target of funeral wreaths, sent to the supergroup's agency Hybe because he was drink-driving on an e-scooter. His behaviour was illegal and unbefitting, but did it warrant such an extreme response?