June 17, 2010
Media coverage of the change of the prime minister was similar to what they had done under the former Liberal Democratic and Komei government. With its intent to overcome a deadlock and to regain public support, the former LDP-Komei government frequently changed prime ministers. Responding to such moves, the media fueled public expectations of a change of direction in the political situation and the possibilities in a “new government” without examining why the government had reached an impasse in the first place.
When former Prime Minister Hatoyama Yukio resigned just eight months after his inauguration due to public distrust, what the DPJ did was the same as the LDP, just changing the prime minister without changing policies.
The media, especially TV networks, indicated that the U.S. Futenma base relocation issue and money-politics corruption scandals were settled because Hatoyama stepped down as prime minister.
Instead of taking a closer look at those issues, the media focused on how the DPJ can get rid of the influence of former DPJ top leader Ozawa Ichiro during the process of appointing the new DPJ leadership and the Kan Cabinet members. This media coverage gave the public the impression that the Kan Cabinet is clean, and contributed to an abrupt recovery in public support for the DPJ.
If the media flatters the Kan administration without accusing the DPJ of abandoning its responsibility on various issues, including the relocation of the U.S. Futenma base issue, it is natural that the media is to be blamed for ignoring its watchdog role in journalism.
In addition, the media should be criticized for failing to take a fair and just stance on their coverage of the new administration. Since the new administration was inaugurated, only DPJ and LDP lawmakers have appeared on major TV programs, promoting their justification for increasing the consumption tax and for the Japan-U.S. agreement on moving the Futenma base within Okinawa. By excluding JCP members calling for the unconditional removal of the base from TV programs, the Okinawan people’s majority opinion was deisregarded. With the House of Councilors election just around the corner, such an overtly biased treatment of political parties is extremely unjust.
In the brief period of time leading up to national elections, it is a minimum requirement for the media to provide various opinions to voters to uphold their right to know what options are available. The upcoming House of Councilors election’s key issue is whether to continue policies which are subservient to the United States and large corporations. The media should take a fair and just position which is independent of political power.
- Akahata, June 17, 2010
The media, especially TV networks, indicated that the U.S. Futenma base relocation issue and money-politics corruption scandals were settled because Hatoyama stepped down as prime minister.
Instead of taking a closer look at those issues, the media focused on how the DPJ can get rid of the influence of former DPJ top leader Ozawa Ichiro during the process of appointing the new DPJ leadership and the Kan Cabinet members. This media coverage gave the public the impression that the Kan Cabinet is clean, and contributed to an abrupt recovery in public support for the DPJ.
If the media flatters the Kan administration without accusing the DPJ of abandoning its responsibility on various issues, including the relocation of the U.S. Futenma base issue, it is natural that the media is to be blamed for ignoring its watchdog role in journalism.
In addition, the media should be criticized for failing to take a fair and just stance on their coverage of the new administration. Since the new administration was inaugurated, only DPJ and LDP lawmakers have appeared on major TV programs, promoting their justification for increasing the consumption tax and for the Japan-U.S. agreement on moving the Futenma base within Okinawa. By excluding JCP members calling for the unconditional removal of the base from TV programs, the Okinawan people’s majority opinion was deisregarded. With the House of Councilors election just around the corner, such an overtly biased treatment of political parties is extremely unjust.
In the brief period of time leading up to national elections, it is a minimum requirement for the media to provide various opinions to voters to uphold their right to know what options are available. The upcoming House of Councilors election’s key issue is whether to continue policies which are subservient to the United States and large corporations. The media should take a fair and just position which is independent of political power.
- Akahata, June 17, 2010
