A detailed reconstruction of the NHK program alteration controversy, exposing fabricated reporting by Asahi Shimbun and ideological interference linked to North Korea–aligned groups.

This was not political interference in broadcasting, but a coordinated propaganda operation falsely framed as such.

2017-07-10

Just now, I discovered an extremely valuable and well-researched work online, and I would like to introduce it here.

Even a single fabricated report by Masakazu Honda regarding this matter should have been enough to justify the closure of the Asahi Shimbun.

All Japanese citizens, as well as people around the world, must understand how profoundly malicious this newspaper company is.

What follows is an examination of the NHK program alteration issue that came to light in 2005.

The issue originated with the January 30, 2001 broadcast by NHK of the second night of the ETV Special titled “War-Time Sexual Violence Questioned.”

On January 12, 2005, the Asahi Shimbun reported that political pressure had led to alterations in the program’s content.

Subsequent investigations and court proceedings, however, revealed that this reporting was false.

Mr. Nakagawa met NHK executives only after the broadcast, and Mr. Abe’s meeting occurred at a time when editorial changes were no longer possible.

The program revisions had already been initiated internally within NHK, prior to any meetings with politicians.

Furthermore, it was revealed that the producer involved in the program, Erika Ikeda, was an executive member of VAWW-NET Japan, an ideological advocacy group.

The so-called “Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal” featured in the program was a mock trial lacking fairness and neutrality, and some of those appearing as prosecutors were later identified as North Korean agents and banned from entering Japan.

In other words, the program was an act of political propaganda carried out via public broadcasting, constituting a clear violation of the Broadcasting Act.

Nevertheless, the Asahi Shimbun and other media outlets concealed these facts, distorted the timeline, and fabricated the narrative of “political interference.”

Finally, it emerged that Masakazu Honda, the journalist who wrote the Asahi article, had himself participated in the mock tribunal.

Under such circumstances, the loss of credibility was inevitable.