Using Tatsuya Uchida’s remarks on Asahi Shimbun’s financial troubles as a starting point, this essay questions whether the newspaper should be “saved” and examines the impact Asahi has had on Japan’s national interests and honor.
It sharply considers the outcome of the anti-Abe and anti-Japan tone that persisted throughout the Heisei era.

2019-06-06
If Mr. Uchida and others think it is a grave matter, then they may cooperate with those connected with Asahi and take whatever measures they like to “save” it.

The following is a continuation of the previous chapter.
Asahi Shimbun’s Distress and Anti-Abe Sentiment.
Here, let us once again take a look at Tatsuya Uchida’s Twitter.
Asahi Shimbun seems to be in quite terrible financial shape somehow.
The other day I heard from a certain writer that the manuscript fee for a serialized column had been cut by 20 percent, but the fee offered today for a dialogue session of about one hour was 10,000 yen.
Asahi Shimbun… I wonder if it is all right. (April 16)
After this, Mr. Uchida continued to post a series of tweets, and while defending himself by saying things such as, “I’m not complaining that the fee is low,” he also said, “At this rate, it is possible that one day a national newspaper representing Japan will suddenly disappear, leaving readers dumbfounded,” and then concluded as follows.
Considering the magnitude of the social impact that would bring, shouldn’t “how to support newspapers” be something the media discuss with all their collective strength? Or am I wrong?
Hmm.
It has become a murmur somehow resembling the Soryushi column, one cannot tell what it is trying to say.
Whether one thinks 10,000 yen for one hour is cheap or expensive depends on the person.
However, not only Mr. Uchida but also I, unworthy though I am, and others who work in speech and writing, do not necessarily have our “fees” determined or guaranteed by the amount of time we are bound.
Some jobs are financially worthwhile, and others are not.
There is a comparison often made by people in the industry, that “if you include the time spent on preliminary research, the hourly wage was lower than that of a fast-food clerk.”
However, the fact that money alone is not the standard by which one chooses work is also a privilege of independent commentators.
Even if a job pays well, one may refuse it if one dislikes it, and there are jobs one ought to do even if the financial merit is small.
One editor said that afterward he would like to ask whether Mr. Uchida in fact accepted or did not accept Asahi’s 10,000-yen “dialogue” job.
On the other hand, what concerns me in Mr. Uchida’s tweet is the part where he says, “If a national newspaper like Asahi were suddenly to disappear, it would be a grave matter.”
He says that wisdom should be gathered to save it, but is that really so?
We Japanese citizens have experienced in the Heisei era the consolidation and abolition of financial institutions including the megabanks, mergers of major companies, and business failures.
Compared with that, unpleasant though it may be to say, I do not think that for many citizens it would be a serious matter if merely one national newspaper in Japan, and moreover one that has continued to exert a negative influence on Japan’s national interest and on the honor of the Japanese people, were to disappear.
If Mr. Uchida and others think it is a grave matter, then they may cooperate with those connected with Asahi and take whatever measures they like to “save” it.
To be continued.