Originally published on April 14, 2019.
This chapter questions NHK’s use of Korean directors in programs dealing with Japan–Korea issues, arguing from the standpoint of objectivity, fairness, and historical accuracy expected of a public broadcaster.
Referring also to South Korea’s historical education, its state-authorized textbooks, and Article 4 of Japan’s Broadcasting Act, it asks why there was any need to take such a risk in the first place.

2019-04-16
NHK continues to broadcast programs that violate Article 4 of the Broadcasting Act…
and when it comes to programs involving Japan–Korea issues, is not the use of Korean staff risky in terms of objectivity and historical accuracy?

“There is no guarantee that he has freed himself from the anti-Japan education he received continuously from early childhood in South Korea.”
A chapter I published on 2019-04-14 under that title ranked 21st in the official hashtag ranking: Peru.
Another chapter I published on 2019-02-21 under the title,
“It appears that questions were raised from the time of broadcast as to why NHK used a Korean director,”
ranked 37th in the official hashtag ranking: Peru.
A little while ago, I discovered the following article, which shows the true value of the internet.
NHK employees should make their origins clear, and alias names should be abolished!
Now that alias names themselves have become breeding grounds for crime,
has the alias-name system permitted only to certain foreigners not come to do more harm than good?
There may of course be many arguments on the matter, but I would like the producers involved in creating programs for NHK, a public broadcaster, to make their origins clear.
If programs involving the Korean Peninsula are produced by people whose origins lie on the peninsula, fairness cannot be guaranteed.
Of course I do not say this in the sense of discrimination.
For example, if this were a staff member from Peru producing a program about the relationship between Japan and Peru, there would be no problem at all.
However, though it may scarcely need saying now, the history of Japan–Korea relations as presented by South Korea departs markedly from historical fact.
If a resident Korean in Japan who may have been influenced by that fabricated view of history is involved in a Japan–Korea program on Japan’s public broadcaster, would it not be not entirely mistaken to say that fairness and accuracy cannot be guaranteed?
When people watch NHK, viewers do not check the origins of the producers one by one.
It is also a grave fact that the public learns that some of those involved were resident Koreans only when they commit crimes.
Omitted here.
Next, there is a director named Jeon Yong-seung.
He is a Korean director from Seoul, South Korea, and at the time was also a director for TV Asahi’s Hōdō Station.
He was involved in a violence incident that became the subject of a weekly magazine article.
Article in Shukan Shincho.
2004.05.20
[Article quotation]
Korean director Jeon Yong-seung (35) assaulted a Japanese director during a drinking gathering.
In response to an inquiry, he brazenly said, “It is true that there was trouble, but it was nothing serious.”
The cause of the assault was a disagreement over how North Korea and South Korea should be reported on within the program.
He resorted to violence over a difference of opinion and showed no sign of remorse.
Viewers are therefore invited to place their hopes in the fair production of news programs by this exemplary Korean.
[End quotation]
Programs Mr. Jeon Yong-seung handled at NHK.
He was in charge of the ETV Special series Japan and the Korean Peninsula: 2000 Years, part of Project JAPAN, in which NHK recently lost in court.
I find it difficult to understand why a Korean director had to be used in examining Japan–Korea issues.
This too is not a statement made from a discriminatory viewpoint.
This work was apparently made only eight years after he came to Japan,
which means there is no guarantee that he had freed himself from the anti-Japan education he had continuously received from early childhood in South Korea.
Since I have only caught glimpses of opinions saying there were anti-Japan elements, and have not watched the program myself, I am not speaking at the level of its actual content, but at the level of “risk,” in saying that it is improper to employ Koreans in making programs on Japan–Korea issues.
NHK in particular is a public broadcaster supported by the money of the Japanese people, and so it must be cautious not to damage the national interest.
It appears that questions were raised from the time of broadcast as to why NHK used a Korean director.
At the time this program was aired, he had apparently been in Japan for eight years.
As for Mr. Lee Ki-eon, I can find no other data than that he was involved in a program titled Reviving the Bonds Across the Strait: 400 Years of the Korean Envoys.
Nevertheless, I feel great unease as to whether a Korean can truly view the “Korean envoys” fairly.
Perhaps the subject was depicted correctly in the end, but one still thinks, “Why deliberately use a Korean, and take such a risk?”
If one searches online using the phrase “South Korea’s state-authorized textbooks,” one can find related articles and read part of how falsified and distorted they are.
As for NHK’s continued broadcasting of programs that violate Article 4 of the Broadcasting Act, I have dealt with that in various past articles and will not touch on it here, but especially in programs involving Japan–Korea issues, I wish to say that the use of Koreans is risky in terms of objectivity and historical accuracy.
I do not understand the necessity of deliberately using Koreans.