June 27, 2011
Until the severe nuclear accident occurred at TEPCO’s Fukushima plant, not only the political-business-academic spectrum but also mass media had been deeply involved in a nuclear “safety myth” campaign. Media Research Institute researcher Kato Hisaharu, ex-director for Nippon Television Network (NTV), expressed his opinions of the “media and nuclear energy” in Akahata of June 27:
In the wake of a nuclear meltdown at Three Mile Island in 1979, nuclear energy PR programs and spot CMs increased in the Japanese TV medium.
In 1985, NTV, where I served as a director of documentaries, tried to produce a pro-nuclear program – “Magical stories on energy” in tie-ups with TEPCO. In the program, a TV personality visits the Fukushima Daiichi Plant and touts nuclear fuel for the most effective source of energy.
At that time, however, many people still reacted sharply against the construction of nuclear power plants (NPPs). TV stations also frequently faced strong opposition from viewers about nuclear matters. The NTV workers’ union put the issue of nuclear hype on the agenda of collective bargaining and pressed the company to not produce the pro-nuclear program.
The company’s network ended up broadcasting the controversial program nationwide, but one of its local affiliate station Nihonkai Telecasting chose to change the program to another one because an anti-NPPs movement was growing in strength in that region.
Nuclear PR programs in recent years have become more subtle. Television Niigata Network, another NTV local affiliate, made a documentary titled “Ripples of the Rhine” in 2001 taking up the topic of pollution in Germany. The program promoted nuclear energy as a clean source that does not emit carbon dioxide.
Spot ads have gotten more TV exposure than PR programs recently. This is because program production needs more money and time, and must use a roundabout way to promote nuclear energy. In contrast, the power industry can directly advertise positive images of nuclear energy in TV messages. Electric power companies are good solid patrons for advertising agencies, too. Their commercials stress “clean, cheap, stable, and safe” images of nuclear energy.
Nuclear promoters pay an enormous amount of money for TV ads. Reportedly, each power firm spends 9 billion yen a year to broadcast ads on 130 channels, including local ones. The total spent would probably amount to 20 to 25 billion yen, I assume.
Meanwhile, documentaries that oppose or question the promotion of nuclear energy have begun to appear.
For example, Aomori Broadcasting aired a documentary that tracks a local movement opposed to the construction of the nuclear reprocessing plant at Rokkasho Village in Aomori. Ishikawa TV has also enhanced its reputation by producing a program documenting the power company’s maneuvering tricks to persuade local residents to accept the construction of the Shika NPP on the Noto Peninsula in Ishikawa.
However, Aomori Broadcasting, for some reason, closed the section that produced the program.
At present, it has become more difficult to make programs questioning nuclear energy. If one makes a program critical of nuclear energy, power companies soon withdraw their sponsorship of that TV program. They have put more pressure on the broadcasters than before and even draw up program plans to promote more positive nuclear images.
Viewers now need to watch nuclear PR programs with more critical eyes and encourage TV stations to rebroadcast programs of good quality.
In the wake of a nuclear meltdown at Three Mile Island in 1979, nuclear energy PR programs and spot CMs increased in the Japanese TV medium.
In 1985, NTV, where I served as a director of documentaries, tried to produce a pro-nuclear program – “Magical stories on energy” in tie-ups with TEPCO. In the program, a TV personality visits the Fukushima Daiichi Plant and touts nuclear fuel for the most effective source of energy.
At that time, however, many people still reacted sharply against the construction of nuclear power plants (NPPs). TV stations also frequently faced strong opposition from viewers about nuclear matters. The NTV workers’ union put the issue of nuclear hype on the agenda of collective bargaining and pressed the company to not produce the pro-nuclear program.
The company’s network ended up broadcasting the controversial program nationwide, but one of its local affiliate station Nihonkai Telecasting chose to change the program to another one because an anti-NPPs movement was growing in strength in that region.
Nuclear PR programs in recent years have become more subtle. Television Niigata Network, another NTV local affiliate, made a documentary titled “Ripples of the Rhine” in 2001 taking up the topic of pollution in Germany. The program promoted nuclear energy as a clean source that does not emit carbon dioxide.
Spot ads have gotten more TV exposure than PR programs recently. This is because program production needs more money and time, and must use a roundabout way to promote nuclear energy. In contrast, the power industry can directly advertise positive images of nuclear energy in TV messages. Electric power companies are good solid patrons for advertising agencies, too. Their commercials stress “clean, cheap, stable, and safe” images of nuclear energy.
Nuclear promoters pay an enormous amount of money for TV ads. Reportedly, each power firm spends 9 billion yen a year to broadcast ads on 130 channels, including local ones. The total spent would probably amount to 20 to 25 billion yen, I assume.
Meanwhile, documentaries that oppose or question the promotion of nuclear energy have begun to appear.
For example, Aomori Broadcasting aired a documentary that tracks a local movement opposed to the construction of the nuclear reprocessing plant at Rokkasho Village in Aomori. Ishikawa TV has also enhanced its reputation by producing a program documenting the power company’s maneuvering tricks to persuade local residents to accept the construction of the Shika NPP on the Noto Peninsula in Ishikawa.
However, Aomori Broadcasting, for some reason, closed the section that produced the program.
At present, it has become more difficult to make programs questioning nuclear energy. If one makes a program critical of nuclear energy, power companies soon withdraw their sponsorship of that TV program. They have put more pressure on the broadcasters than before and even draw up program plans to promote more positive nuclear images.
Viewers now need to watch nuclear PR programs with more critical eyes and encourage TV stations to rebroadcast programs of good quality.
