Published on February 23, 2020.
This article cites an essay by writer and journalist Kadota Ryusho published in the Sankei Shimbun, criticizing newspaper coverage during the national crisis of the new pneumonia outbreak.
It argues that the Asahi Shimbun clung to the “Cherry Blossom Viewing Party” issue and devoted itself to supporting the opposition parties, while failing to properly report on Japan’s weak border controls against the new coronavirus from China and the government’s excessive deference to China, thereby questioning the true mission of newspapers.

February 23, 2020
This was because newspapers, without fulfilling their original mission, spent their days, “as usual,” clinging to their own principles and claims and supporting specific political forces.
The worst of them, after all, was the Asahi.
The following is from today’s Sankei Shimbun.
Every decent Japanese citizen who read this essay must surely have thought that the Asahi Shimbun is rotten to the core.
How Did They Confront a “National Crisis”?
Writer and journalist Kadota Ryusho
Watching newspaper coverage of the “national crisis” of the new pneumonia outbreak, I have done nothing but sigh for the past month.
This was because newspapers, without fulfilling their original mission, spent their days, “as usual,” clinging to their own principles and claims and supporting specific political forces.
The worst of them, after all, was the Asahi.
It clung to the issue of the “Cherry Blossom Viewing Party,” while paying no attention whatsoever to the national crisis.
Let me introduce only part of the headlines to show what an astonishing series of articles appeared.
◇ “Diet of Suspicions” Opens: Prime Minister, in Policy Speech, Does Not Touch on “Sakura,” IR, or Ministerial Resignations〉〈Prime Minister Silent on Suspicions: His Posture of Trying to Draw the Curtain Is Blatant in the Ordinary Diet Session〉〈Prime Minister Keeps Running Away: Does Not Answer Head-On About His Own “Sakura” Suspicions〉〈Editorial: The Prime Minister and the Diet — Can He Be Proud of His Words and Actions?〉
These are only a few examples, but even from them one can imagine what the articles were like.
The opposition parties repeatedly refused deliberations over the Sakura issue, and while they hurled extremely rude questions at the prime minister of a nation, such as “a sea bream rots from the head,” newspapers, far from admonishing them, continued to run articles supporting them.
On the occasion of the party convention of the Constitutional Democratic Party, the Asahi gave full support in its editorial of the 17th, saying, “It must take care to bring together the power of the opposition parties.
In addition to cooperation in Diet debates that question the problems of the administration, can they prepare for voters an alternative to the LDP-Komeito administration in the next general election?”
On the other hand, the Yomiuri admonished them in its editorial, saying, “Although they show an intention to take charge of national politics, it is difficult to understand why they have not clearly presented detailed diplomatic guidelines or security policies.
They should put together a comprehensive vision covering both domestic affairs and diplomacy.”
It goes without saying which was more accurate.
Then what kind of reporting did they do on the new pneumonia?
From the end of January into February, various countries took measures to ban entry from all of China, yet Japan imposed entry restrictions only from Wuhan and Hubei Province, and later Zhejiang Province as well.
Moreover, at immigration inspection, Japan continued an unbelievable measure under which people were merely asked, “Have you stayed in Hubei Province within the past two weeks?” and if they answered “No,” they could enter the country as they were.
Almost no newspapers criticized this, and only the Sankei sharply condemned the “immigration control that was like scooping water with a bamboo basket,” saying, “Politicians should fear the harm of inaction,” in its issue of the 18th.
The Asahi developed its coverage from the perspective that “discrimination is rampant” in connection with China, as represented by its article of the 9th, “Child Returning from China: Nursery School Overreacts, Says ‘Please Stop the Visit’ Because of New Pneumonia.”
As expected, it never forgets to support China, no matter what the occasion.
It did not report warnings about the administration’s sloppy border measures, nor did it report whether there was something behind its excessive deference to China.
It is only natural that readers should abandon newspapers.