日本語

The old media (TV, radio, newspapers) and the new media (SNS, web content, other media) #2

In this article, we would like to write about this theme again.

The trigger for the old media to discuss “the new media” was the win by Motohiko Saito in the recent Hyogo governor election.
This discussion positions only the old media as legitimate, treating the new media not as an equal partner worthy of respect. (And yet, they still distribute news with advertisements. )
Indeed, after the election, one TV program stated that “television is regulated by law” and “must continue broadcasting with public interest in mind,” and another program stated that “when elections begin, we ensure fairness. We also do not broadcast without fact-checking.”

So why are they only comparing “during the election campaign”? It’s no wonder the old media are on completely different pages with viewers.
Additionally, regarding the claim that “we won’t broadcast without fact-checking” – how many people do they think actually believe that ?
If this claim were true, please provide all the evidence for broadcasting so much about Governor Saito.
(“We checked, but it actually was the wrong source” is unacceptable. That’s not fact-checking.)
Most people don’t distinguish between ‘broadcasts during the election campaign’ and ‘broadcasts during other periods’. Also, even before the election, they kept criticism of the candidate until just before the election campaign began. Impressions are created through day-to-day broadcasts like this.

1. The old media are not fair and neutral

The old media consist not only of the television networks, but also radio stations and newspapers, including those in regional areas.
Regarding the recent Hyogo governor election, the old media consistently reported in a stance diametrically opposed to new media, effectively endorsing candidate Inamura against former governor Saito.
However, the result of this Hyogo governor election was a landslide win for former governor Saito.
It is clear that the old media’s reporting was intentionally biased, as evidenced by their starting to discuss “regulating new media” in response to this result.

The first step should be to request an external verification of why it is called biased coverage.
Do folks in the old media truly believe they’re broadcasting completely without bias, fair and neutral ?For example, when Diet members do the same thing, if they are the Liberal Democratic Party(hereinafter called LDP) of Japan members, they are criticized as “slush fund Diet members,” but if they are opposition party members, it is not reported as “simply an omitted entry.”
For example, they broadcast criticism of specific individuals or political parties without presenting solid evidence, creating a negative impression.

While advocating for diversity and democracy, they completely exclude anyone who has different ways of thinking.
Given this, are the old media claiming their coverage is fair and neutral, unbiased, because their viewers consist entirely of people who share their own way of thinking ?
This stance will never stop the decline of the old media.
(In reality, the phenomenon known as the decline of the old media isn’t caused only this one factor. )

We are not denying that the old media reports in a way that supports specific political parties or activists.
That’s why they are called “biased coverage” when they claim to be “fair and neutral” while broadcasting in a way that supports specific parties or activists.
We believe the old media should clearly state their own political and ideological positions. Once each media outlet’s political and ideological position becomes clear, they will no longer be called “biased coverage.”  In fact, it would make it easier for viewers to choose which programs to watch.
Indeed, in the United States, there are television stations that openly support either the Democratic or Republican Party and report accordingly.
If declaring a clear political or ideological position is legally problematic, we could say that there is a gig gap between such laws and the reality of the old media. In that case, we believe that experts and lawmakers should have a fruitful discussion about that law.

2. The old media’s sense of privilege that only they are legitimate media

What became clear in this case is the old media’s attitude that “only they are legitimate media, and only their claims are correct.” Also, strangely, even the people appearing on the old media seem to think “they are special individuals”.

Therefore, they probably believe that only their own way of thinking is correct, and that people with different ways of thinking should be excluded.
In fact, people associated with the old media are claiming that regulations should be established for the new media.
Furthermore, when a certain comedian appeared as a commentator, he reportedly pointed out that “there are people who vote not based on character, but simply on whether someone can do the job. I interpreted that many of the people who lived in this area think this way”.
From this statement, it’s clear that people associated with the old media are essentially claiming that “they are special individuals, and ordinary people are stupid”. Actually, this statement isn’t just a sense of privilege but outright discrimination.
In reality, the old media allow to appear such individuals who “deny the character of specific people (which would be called bullying if ordinary people did the same) and make disparaging remarks about people who voted (remarks that would be called discriminatory if ordinary people made them)”, and the corporate sponsors supporting them can be said to share the same thinking.

The stance of completely excluding people who hold different ways of thinking denies diversity and is an act that contradicts their own statements.
Just as media outlets have political and ideological positions, every individual has their own way of thinking.
We believe it is the bare minimum requirement for media to report while accepting that there are people whose ways of thinking are diametrically opposed to their own.

Reference: Sports Houchi(2024/12/29)
https://hochi.news/articles/20241201-OHT1T51032.html?page=1

Reference: Sankei Sports(2024/11/20)
https://www.sanspo.com/article/20241118-LF3G4435TFH5TKVATHUTPXHPBY/

Thanks.
2024/01/05 – 2025/12/22