Written on May 14, 2019, this essay examines references to Shuichi Yutaka, Takashi Uemura, Norio Suzuki, and Kiyotaka Kitabatake to argue that the Osaka Social Affairs Desk of the Asahi Shimbun was the epicenter of the comfort women reporting scandal, and sharply criticizes the perversity of those involved obscuring their own responsibility while demanding apologies from others.

2019-05-14
Norio Suzuki, who ordered Takashi Uemura to cover South Korea, was a desk editor in the Osaka Social Affairs Department, and at the time of the 1997 comfort women feature he was the head of the Osaka Social Affairs Department.
It says that at the time his title was “Deputy Head of the Social Affairs Department, Asahi Shimbun Osaka Headquarters.”
The chapter I published on 2017-01-05 under the title, “Why Is This Title on the Asahi Shimbun Web…,” ranked No. 22 yesterday in Ameba’s search count rankings.
As for Shuichi Yutaka, the following kind of article also came up.
The passages between the asterisks are mine.
Idobata Kaigi Kawaraban.
2016-04-06.
Shuichi Yutaka, Who Argues that “Prime Minister Abe Should Directly Apologize to Former Comfort Women,” Carefully Hides His Own Career History
Shuichi Yutaka, who serves as an editorial writer at the Asahi Shimbun, proposed in a dialogue with Makoto Iokibe, “How about Prime Minister Abe directly conveying words of apology to the former comfort women?”
It is an extremely brazen attitude, but this is the quality of the Asahi Shimbun, and it is obvious that expecting anything higher will only end in futility.
“How about Abe going to meet the elderly former comfort women in person and conveying words of apology?
Would that not enable him to become a great statesman like West Germany’s Chancellor Brandt?”
This was the first time I learned that employees of the Asahi Shimbun think in terms of a great statesman like West Germany’s Chancellor Brandt.
But I am convinced that the view of any sensible Japanese citizen is that Prime Minister Abe as he is now is already a far greater statesman.
“If he were to go out and, for example, meet them at the embassy in Seoul, I think that could happen.
At the time of the Asian Women’s Fund too, Japan’s prime minister sent a heartfelt letter to each one of them.
So I think it would also be possible for him to hand it to them personally, grasp their hands, and convey his feelings.
But would they reject that?
Would some of them accept it?
If their supporters were to show a forward-looking attitude, I think there would be a possibility, but I do not think he can go to a place where they say, ‘We absolutely cannot accept the agreement.’”
The article identifies Mr. Yutaka’s career as follows: “After serving as an editorial writer and deputy head of the Social Affairs Department at the Tokyo Headquarters, he became an Asahi Shimbun editorial board member in charge of the Constitution, media, and judicial matters.”
But how many people noticed that one particular part of his career was neatly concealed?
Mr. Yutaka once stood at the lectern as an instructor in 2011 for the collaborative lecture “Hanshin Culture Theory” between Konan University and the Asahi Shimbun.
If one checks what title he had at that time, it was as follows.
At the time his title was “Deputy Head of the Social Affairs Department, Asahi Shimbun Osaka Headquarters.”
Why is this title not listed on Asahi Shimbun Web RONZA?
The reason is that “all of the people at the Asahi Shimbun who dragged out the comfort women issue were affiliated with the Osaka Headquarters Social Affairs Department.”
Takashi Uemura, who wrote the bylined article saying that women were “taken to the battlefield under the name of the Women’s Volunteer Corps,” was a reporter in the Osaka Social Affairs Department of the Asahi Shimbun.
Kiyotaka Kitabatake, who wrote multiple editorials making Seiji Yoshida into a hero and is believed to have argued for “active atonement” in the editorial published the day after Uemura’s article, which became a major false report, was an editorial writer at the Osaka Headquarters.
Norio Suzuki, who ordered Takashi Uemura to cover South Korea, was a desk editor in the Osaka Social Affairs Department, and at the time of the 1997 comfort women feature he was the head of the Osaka Social Affairs Department.
Why was it that a person who held an important post in the Osaka Social Affairs Department, the epicenter of the scandal, did not take the lead in saying, “Let us convey words of apology to the readers.
If we do that, the Asahi Shimbun can become a truly great newspaper”?
If they cannot even take responsibility for the problem they themselves caused, readers will not listen to the claims of the Asahi Shimbun, and on the internet all that will happen is that their sanctimoniousness will be harshly denounced.
To ordinary people, they will seem like spoiled children.
But unless they show exactly this kind of brazen, defiant attitude, they cannot survive as reporters at the Asahi Shimbun.
However, the Asahi Shimbun will probably never take out apology advertisements in newspapers around the world over the comfort women issue and go around bowing to the ground.
That is because their pride would never allow them to bow their heads to foolish commoners.
If some bookmaker somewhere were to offer bets on “whether the Asahi Shimbun will acknowledge its own fault and apologize over the comfort women issue,” I think the level would be such that no bet could even be成立.
They need to understand that a posture of being extremely lenient and defiant toward wrongdoing within their own organization while continuing to bash others naturally invites public resentment.