Published on January 10, 2020.
This article, based on “Media Insider Report Card” in the monthly magazine Sound Argument, examines the Asahi Shimbun’s persistent pursuit of the “Cherry Blossom Viewing Party” issue and the actual lack of public response despite its editorial campaign.
It also points to the Japan Life scandal, in which figures connected to major media outlets, including a former Asahi political editor, were named, and criticizes the media’s own lack of accountability and self-contradiction while attacking the Abe administration.

January 10, 2020
So few!
Only thirty people?
This is not Shimbun Akahata, so how on earth could they turn that into an article?
The following is a continuation of the previous chapter.
A Boomerang Against the Asahi Shimbun Whose Tune No One Danced To
Editor:
Let us talk about the reporting on the suspicions and pursuit surrounding the “Cherry Blossom Viewing Party.”
To begin with, is this issue really a theme worthy of devoting so much precious time to?
Professor:
The Asahi Shimbun is incredible.
Just looking at its editorials, there are so many editorials lined up on the “Cherry Blossom Viewing Party”: November 13, “The Prime Minister’s Privatization Cannot Be Allowed”; November 15, “The Prime Minister Himself Must Answer the Questions”; November 20, “Harms More Conspicuous Than ‘Stability’”; November 27, “The Prime Minister Must Explain Without Running Away”; and December 10, “Let Us Not Forget the Arrogance of the Administration.”
On the social affairs page dated December 10, after the extraordinary Diet session had ended, it reported on a large scale under the headline “Angry Voices at the Closing of the Diet; Citizens Say, ‘Make Everything Clear,’” and stated, “At the repeated scenes since the Moritomo and Kake problems, angry voices arose from citizens.”
Lady:
Who exactly are these “citizens”?
Professor:
The article further says, “On the night of the 9th, about thirty people gathered in front of the Prime Minister’s Office in Nagatacho, Tokyo, and held a protest.”
Editor:
So few!
Only thirty people?
This is not Shimbun Akahata, so how on earth could they turn that into an article?
Lady:
I think it is an article that plainly shows that, although they tried to stir things up by “rapid-firing” editorials in order to pursue the “Cherry Blossom Viewing Party” thoroughly, “the flute was blown, but no one danced.”
Teacher:
By the way, the Asahi Shimbun has persistently repeated criticism of Abe over the “Cherry Blossom Viewing Party,” but it has come to light that Masaru Tachibana, a former political editor of the Asahi, became an adviser to Japan Life, one of the focal points of the issue, and received advisory fees.
Did you know that?
Lady:
Japan Life is the company that went bankrupt after engaging in a malicious multilevel marketing scheme, isn’t it?
It is a story that has spread all over the Internet, and Yukan Fuji has also reported on the company’s promotional materials.
Those materials stated that there was an invitation to the “Cherry Blossom Viewing Party” in 2015 addressed to former chairman Takayoshi Yamaguchi, and that a social gathering hosted by Yamaguchi was held around Toshihiro Nikai, secretary-general of the Liberal Democratic Party.
It was also written that gathered there were the former political editor of the Asahi Shimbun, political journalist Kenji Goto, who serves as a commentator on TV Asahi’s “Hodo Station,” Toshio Shimada, a former NHK commentator and current head of the Nagoya Broadcasting Station, and Shigekaku Kishii, the late former chief editorial writer of the Mainichi Shimbun, among others.
Yukan Fuji directly confronted Mr. Tachibana about it.
Editor:
There were also names of people connected to Jiji Press, the Nikkei, and the Yomiuri Shimbun.
In short, the noteworthy point is that media people were widely used in the promotion of a multilevel marketing scheme, and that media people who had especially criticized Prime Minister Abe were in fact deeply immersed in Japan Life.
Lady:
That leaves them with zero persuasive power.
They criticized Mr. Abe over the “Cherry Blossom Viewing Party,” but what about themselves?
That is the issue, isn’t it?
Professor:
Exactly.
What is terrible is that, while both the Asahi and TV Asahi were pressing Prime Minister Abe, saying it was privatization and demanding that he explain, a former political editor had become an adviser and they have not sufficiently explained his attendance at the social gathering.
TV Asahi’s public relations department admitted that its own station had not reported on Mr. Goto, but got away with saying, “As for the future, this concerns program production, so we will refrain from answering.”
Do they really intend to criticize the Abe administration with that?
Wouldn’t people say, “You are the last person who should say that”?
Teacher:
What surprised me most was that in 2014, when Japan Life had received administrative guidance from the Consumer Affairs Agency, Mr. Tachibana was receiving advisory fees, but when Yukan Fuji questioned him about that, Mr. Tachibana openly declared, “People may ask me, ‘Don’t you read the newspapers?’ but I did not know.”
Hey, I felt dizzy.
Editor:
Incidentally, it seems that the name of any former senior executive of the Sankei Shimbun was not there.
Teacher:
Spotlessly clean, then.
That is impressive.
As expected of the Sankei!
Editor:
Surely Japan Life either judged that taking in Sankei executives was not useful enough, or thought that they were not even worth bothering with.
In any case, they were not treated as targets.
When I say that myself, it sounds a little lonely and sad, as though they were not treated as full-fledged players.
Professor:
Finally, since it is the year-end and New Year period, shall we think about the buzzword of 2019 as well?
This year’s buzzword of the year was “ONE TEAM,” wasn’t it?
Teacher:
Why did rugby become so popular this year, and why did so many casual new fans appear?
Of course, the first major reason is that Japan’s national team performed well in the World Cup.
But I also think TBS’s Sunday Theater drama “No Side Game” had an influence.
There is no doubt that the drama took up the appeal and greatness of rugby in a way that allowed viewers to “prepare” for the World Cup, and that this led to that level of excitement.
One could say that a single drama lit the fire of a boom, and it showed how powerful, and how important, media expression can be.
I think it was a year that made us truly feel that.