Fromis_9 Members Accuse Pledis Entertainment of “Shadow-Stepping” Rules to Keep Seventeen From Seeing Them

Korean pop has once again been thrown into the spotlight after fromis_9 members Chaeyoung and Jiwon alleged that their label, Pledis Entertainment, imposed humiliating restrictions intended to keep them out of the way of a senior boy group.

According to the account shared on SEVENTEEN member Seungkwan’s YouTube show Bibbidi Bobbidi Boo, Chaeyoung and Jiwon said they were instructed to disappear the moment Seventeen arrived at practice rooms—at times even removing their shoes to avoid being noticed. The remarks have triggered sharp backlash online, with fans and observers questioning whether the alleged system reflects unequal treatment inside the same entertainment company.

“We couldn’t even step on your shadows”: The allegations

On the episode, Seungkwan reportedly welcomed the pair warmly while joking about how the group appeared to leave Pledis without saying goodbye. The conversation quickly shifted from lighthearted banter to more serious details, as Seungkwan said it was the first time he had had a long, candid talk with them.

Jiwon then described their experience at Pledis, saying they were made to feel invisible—stating that they “couldn’t even step on [Seungkwan’s] shadows.” Chaeyoung expanded on the claim, saying staff would instruct them to move out of sight immediately when Seventeen was coming to the practice room. She added that they were told to take off even their shoes and leave, implying the rule was meant to prevent any trace of their presence. Chaeyoung speculated, in the context of the alleged instructions, that it might have been justified by a concern that their feet smelled.

In the retelling, the practice system described was less about simple scheduling and more about enforced invisibility—suggesting that fromis_9 were treated as intruders rather than fellow label artists.

A “never be seen” system in the old building

Seungkwan also corroborated aspects of the story by explaining that, when Seventeen used the basement practice room in the older Pledis building, they “never saw a soul.” He said that there was effectively no interaction or overlap between the groups in that space, which he framed as consistent with what the two women later described.

Chaeyoung said the arrangement depended on advance warnings: staff would notify them when Seventeen’s members were on their way. She recalled the emotional tone of the situation—describing the girls as being worried about being accidentally “seen,” as though they were expected to vanish from the environment the moment senior artists appeared.

In one anecdote, Seungkwan said he once walked into a practice room while a fromis_9 member was singing. He said the member immediately left in panic and apologized profusely, as if she had been caught in the wrong place. Chaeyoung later confessed that it likely was her, adding a personal dimension to the alleged policy.

Backlash centers on fairness and gendered power dynamics

While the claims are being circulated through entertainment commentary, the controversy has widened into a broader debate about how labels manage—who is allowed to take up space, and who is expected to retreat. In reactions shared alongside the report, netizens characterized the alleged rules as misogynistic or rooted in gendered assumptions about junior artists’ role within a company.

Critics argue that even if groups share the same label, internal policies should not create demeaning hierarchies that treat female performers as expendable or invisible. Supporters of the allegations point to the reported nature of the instructions—specifically the idea that fromis_9 were required not only to leave, but to do so quietly and physically remove signs of their presence.

As the story spread, some commenters framed it as a symptom of larger structural issues in K-pop management, where power imbalances can shape working conditions, access to resources, and the emotional well-being of idols.

Why this story matters for the industry

K-pop labels frequently market themselves as “families” with shared resources and mentorship across groups. Yet stories like this highlight how that narrative can clash with the reality of internal workflows—especially when one group is treated as a default priority and another is managed as a secondary inconvenience.

If the account is accurate, the alleged system described by Chaeyoung and Jiwon suggests that the label did not merely schedule practice times differently; it enforced a social boundary between senior and junior acts. That distinction matters because it affects more than logistics—it can influence performers’ sense of belonging, safety, and dignity.

At a time when fans increasingly demand transparency about idol treatment, these claims could also push labels and agencies to address how they structure cross-group environments, training access, and staff conduct.

What happens next

For now, the controversy appears to be driven primarily by the statements made during Seungkwan’s show and the immediate online reaction that followed. Observers will likely watch whether Pledis or related parties respond with clarification, explanation, or a denial.

Meanwhile, fans may also look for additional testimonies—either from other artists at the label or from staff narratives—especially since Seungkwan’s comments were framed as consistent with the “never saw a soul” pattern in a particular practice space.

Regardless of the outcome, the story has added another high-profile chapter to the ongoing debate over how power operates inside K-pop companies—and whether “seniority” is ever allowed to become something more damaging than a simple hierarchy.