The 2005 NHK program alteration controversy was not political interference, but a case rooted in serious violations of broadcasting neutrality and ideological manipulation during production.
This article examines Asahi Shimbun’s reporting by Masakazu Honda, the role of VAWW-NET, North Korean operatives, and the deliberate distortion of the timeline.

2017-07-10 / July 10, 2017

This article documents the true nature of the 2005 NHK program alteration controversy.
Contrary to claims of political interference, the evidence shows that the program had already been substantially altered within NHK due to severe legal and ethical concerns before any meetings with politicians occurred.
The case reveals ideological manipulation involving VAWW-NET, North Korean operatives, and deliberate misreporting by major Japanese media outlets, particularly Asahi Shimbun.
It stands as a critical example of how public broadcasting and journalism can be exploited for propaganda purposes.

2017-07-10
I have just discovered an extremely useful and substantial work on the internet, and I would like to introduce it here.
Based on even a single fabricated report by Masakazu Honda regarding this matter, Asahi Shimbun should have been shut down.
All Japanese citizens and people around the world must know just how malicious this newspaper company is.
All emphasis within the text is mine.

The Media and North Korea That Orchestrated the 2005 NHK Program Alteration Issue

2014/03/17 22:23
Now, beginning with this entry, I will write about the events that occurred in 2005.
First, an overview.
This issue began with a report published by Asahi Shimbun on January 12, 2005, under the headline, “NHK ‘Comfort Women’ Program Altered — NAKAGAWA Akira and ABE Shinzo Pointed Out ‘Bias in Content’ After Executives Were Summoned the Day Before Broadcast.”
The article claimed that political pressure had been exerted prior to the broadcast of the NHK program ETV Special, Episode 2, “Questioning Wartime Sexual Violence,” which aired on January 30, 2001, resulting in alterations to the content.
On the following day, January 13, NHK Program Production Bureau Chief Producer Akira Nagai made an internal whistleblowing claim that there had been “political intervention,” triggering a major controversy.
However, numerous suspicious points were subsequently discovered in Asahi’s reporting and in Nagai’s statements, leading to widespread distrust on the internet toward the media that reported the issue.

The first inconsistency was revealed through investigation: Nakagawa met with NHK executives on February 2, three days after the broadcast, while Abe met them on January 29, the day before the broadcast.
Neither meeting occurred at a time that would have allowed for last-minute editing.
This fact was later confirmed in court.

Furthermore, it was already known before Abe and Nakagawa met NHK officials that the program contained serious problems.
These issues were discussed internally at NHK, and content changes were made to avoid violations of the Broadcast Act.
It was also revealed that Yayori Matsui, the representative of VAWW-NET, which played a central role in the program, was aware that alterations had begun even before the alleged meetings with Abe and Nakagawa.

http://www1.jca.apc.org/vaww-net-japan/nhk/etv2001.html

Why We Sue NHK — Questioning Responsibility for the Alteration of the “Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal” Program

NHK Lawsuit Symposium, July 24, 2001
VAWW-NET Japan Representative, Yayori Matsui

What later became clear was that the program produced on December 27 was viewed on January 19 by the supervising department head, who ordered revisions stating that the program was “too close to the tribunal.”
Based on the revised script of the completed version delivered on the 24th, further changes were made, including re-recording a comment from one of the participants on the 28th and urgently adding an interview with a right-wing scholar the same day to criticize the “tribunal” and “comfort women.”
When NHK executives previewed this version, they ordered further revisions, and the program was cut apart until the very last moment before the January 30 broadcast, transforming it from a program documenting the tribunal into one criticizing it.
This was a broadcast of a program altered through direct intervention by NHK’s upper management.
In short, everything was fabricated.

The accurate timeline of the issue, reconstructed from VAWW-NET’s records from 2001 and subsequent revelations, is as follows:
2001/01/19
First department head preview.
“Too close to the tribunal,” “Different from the original plan,” “This mismatch cannot be corrected.”
“You set us up,” “This will be unacceptable as is,” the department head reportedly raged.
2001/01/21
Editing work begins.
Narration added to the scene declaring the Emperor guilty, and the interview with Yayori Matsui is deleted.
2001/01/24
Editing completed.
Second department head preview held the same day.
“Nothing has changed,” “This is a done deal,” “A complete mismatch,” followed by concrete revision instructions.
2001/01/25
Additional filming and editing begin.
2001/01/28
Additional interviews recorded, critical of the mock tribunal.
2001/01/29
Editing completed.
Abe meets NHK personnel regarding budget matters.
Executive-level preview held; further editing ordered by Chairman Ebisawa and Broadcasting Director-General Matsuo.
2001/01/30
Editing completed. Broadcast aired.

It was also revealed that the program itself had serious fundamental problems.
The program was produced by NHK Enterprise, an NHK subsidiary, and it was discovered that the producer, Eriko Ikeda, was a member of VAWW-NET Japan.
In other words, she produced a program for her own ideological organization while disregarding journalistic neutrality.

Even more problematic was the so-called “Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal” depicted in the program, which was a mock trial conducted without defense attorneys or defendants, with pre-selected participants, unilaterally declaring Emperor Showa and others guilty — a so-called people’s court devoid of fairness or neutrality.
It was later revealed that the individuals appearing as prosecutors, “Hwang Ho-nam” and “Chong Nam-yong,” were in fact North Korean operatives who were subsequently banned from entering Japan.

In other words, the producer used her ideological organization, collaborated with North Korean operatives, and conducted a one-sided people’s tribunal among insiders without opposition, attempting to use public broadcasting for propaganda.
This clearly constituted a violation of the Broadcast Act.
That is why it became an issue within NHK even before any alleged political intervention.

Nevertheless, media outlets led by Asahi Shimbun reported this case as political interference, suppressing these facts and rearranging the timeline to create that impression.

Further problems followed.
After Asahi’s report, Democratic Party Diet member Eiko Ishige held a rally at the Diet Members’ Office Building with a group calling itself the “Emergency Women’s Committee Against Insults and Defamation of the Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal.”
It was later revealed that the organizer of this rally was the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan.

Moreover, the committee’s phone number matched that of the Korean Democratic Women’s Union in Japan, an organization under the General Association, and its representative, Akiko Kim, was a vice-chair of the Association’s Central Committee and a member of the North Korean parliament.

In short, this incident was an attempt by media outlets including Asahi Shimbun and TBS, working with North Korea, to entrap and undermine Abe and Nakagawa, who were known for their tough stance on North Korea.
If one speaks of “political intervention in NHK,” then this was in fact “political intervention in NHK by North Korea and its supporters.”

Finally, one more critical fact was revealed later.
The Asahi Shimbun reporter who wrote the article was Masakazu Honda, and he himself had been a participant in the very “Women’s International War Crimes Tribunal” at issue.
Under such circumstances, it is only natural that trust would be lost.