The following is a continuation of the previous chapter.
Asahi's report is now "slanderous.
Suda.
In the past, if some newspapers or other media were to criticize him heavily, a regular administration would have collapsed.
However, Mr. Abe has not fallen.
That is why the bashing is becoming excessive.
Ogawa.
Of course, since he is steering such a large country, some aspects must be strictly checked.
But that criticism should be a policy debate.
In his policy speech this time, Prime Minister Abe devoted 80% of his speech to domestic policy issues for the first time in the past five years.
In particular, he has been focusing on regional development as a countermeasure to the declining birthrate and aging population and on the human resource development revolution.
He proposed a comprehensive plan to address these issues for the first time.
The Diet should have a great deal of discussion in which it evaluates and criticizes the plan and suggests better ideas.
However, there is no severe criticism or debate.
All we get is "morikake," and the Asahi Shimbun and others fuel it.
They are endlessly slandering based on lies.
Concerned about this situation, I wrote a book titled "In-depth Verification of the Moritomo/Kakei Incident: The Asahi Shimbun's Largest Postwar News Crime" (Asuka Shinsha), in which I pointed out that Asahi's reporting was biased and fabricated.
Suda.
However, Asahi Shimbun sued Ogawa's book and Asuka Shinsha, the publisher, for defamation.
They are seeking 50 million yen in damages and an apology ad.
You can call me a "professional" in libel suits (laughs).
I have been sued nearly 30 times and have yet to lose.
I was even surprised by the latest lawsuit.
I have never heard of the media suing the same press and then suing an individual.
Politicians and corporations may sue media outlets, but in general, media outlets usually respond to disputes with "speech for speech," I am sure the media themselves have said as much.
So why did the Asahi Shimbun sue the individual author and the publisher this time?
How did this happen?
A slap lawsuit
Hanada
Mr. Ogawa's book was released at the end of October last year.
One month later, at the end of November, I received a "letter of inquiry" from the public relations department manager of Asahi Shimbun.
The letter stated that there were 16 points in Mr. Ogawa's book that needed to be corrected.
By the deadline, Mr. Ogawa and Asuka Shinsha responded politely.
They said that if there were any errors, they would correct them, and if there were any objections, they would be prepared to publish them.
In fact, some parts were corrected in the next edition.
However, the Asahi Shimbun responded, "We disagree with the content of your response. We will consider how to respond in the future." After that, we never heard from them again, but on December 25, they suddenly announced the lawsuit.
Suda
And they are demanding 50 million yen in damages.
It is also strange, but I heard that the complaint was posted online before it arrived.
Kadota
Asahi's lawsuit is a typical slap lawsuit.
A slap lawsuit is a lawsuit brought by a large corporation that has the power to recover its reputation without going to court to intimidate and suppress the speech of freelance journalists and writers who write critical articles for the corporation.
Asahi could have countered with any number of arguments in speech if it wanted to, but it jumped the gun and took the case to court.
They should be condemned.
Hanada.
The Asahi Shimbun can publish 179,000 words in one section of its morning edition.
That's enough information to fill a new book every day.
If they have something to say about a book, they can refute it as much as they want in print.
Without doing so, they suddenly filed a lawsuit.
It is the first case like this in the history of the media.
Suda
You are a literary critic, but you also did some research in writing this book criticizing "Morikake," didn't you?
Ogawa
Of course, I did.
I was "astonished" by Asahi's complaint.
Suda
I heard you also went to that "shady bar" where former Vice Minister of Education Kihei Maekawa used to go.
Ogawa
It was a "dating bar" (laughs).
Indeed, I did not interview the Asahi Shimbun because the book is a review of the articles themselves, so there is no need to cover the reporters' opinions or the company's views.
However, we interviewed people involved in the Prime Minister's Office, Osaka Prefecture, and many other areas.
To begin with, what is the main point of this book? The Moritomo Gakuen issue first started in February 2005 with the Asahi scoop.
Then, on May 17, the "Prime Minister's Intention" document regarding the Kakei Gakuen issue was reported on the front page.
The two issues have in common that the Asahi Shimbun wrote about the "Abe scandal."
The Asahi Shimbun undoubtedly led the charge for five months, saying that the prime minister and his wife must have been close friends of both parties and that Abe may have given preferential treatment to his friends.
And the Cabinet's approval rating, which averaged around 60% during this period, has fallen below 30%.
It is because "Prime Minister Abe has not fulfilled his accountability on the Morikake issue."
If this were a "major incident" and a country's prime minister would be disqualified because of an international scandal involving money, such as the Lockheed case, I would understand.
But "morikake" is not.
So, a cabinet was about to be toppled by an outright lie.
I thought this was a problem, so I read more than 600 "morikake" reports in the Asahi Shimbun last year.
After reading them, I found that I "didn't understand anything" (laughs).
I had no idea how the incident happened, the issues, or to what extent Asahi had grasped the situation before writing about it.
Then, when I read the minutes of the meetings of Osaka Prefecture, where Moritomo Gakuen had applied to establish a new elementary school, Imabari City in Ehime Prefecture, where Kake Gakuen had applied to establish a special national strategic zone for a new veterinary school, and the Japan Veterinary Medical Association, the whole picture immediately became apparent.
It turned out that what Asahi had worked so hard to report as if it had something to do with Prime Minister Abe and the Prime Minister's Office, was complete and utter nonsense.
What is the problem with calling this a "creation" or a "fabrication"?
Hanada.
The complaint can be read in its entirety on the "Asahi Shimbun Corporate Website," and I urge everyone to read it, but on the third page of the complaint, it says, to my surprise.
Plaintiffs have not reported that Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was involved in the above two issues (Note: Moritomo and Kake issues). Nor did we know that Prime Minister Abe was not involved.
Suda.
Does it really say that?
Isn't that precisely what they are fabricating? (Laughter)
Hanada.
That's what it says in the complaint (laughs).
(laughs) It's outrageous.
It is an outrageous thing to say after having made more than six hundred articles last year that raised suspicions about the "involvement of the prime minister.
Ogawa
Asahi's article is particularly problematic because of the headline.
On May 17, the front page headline read, "New faculty at the will of the PM.
It is equivalent to reporting that the prime minister was involved.
If they continue to report such a thing every day for more than half a year, Asahi's readers will think, "Mr. Abe is to blame for the "morikake. But he still needs to fulfill his accountability."
No allegations of "morikake"
Kadota.
It is necessary to look back calmly once again after some time.
For example, it has already been a year since the Moritomo news broke.
Let's examine the Moritomo Gakuen issue from the beginning. We can see that Yasunori Kagoike, the president of Moritomo Gakuen, reduced the price of the land by 800 million yen due to waste disposal and other reasons in the process of buying and selling state-owned land.
The Moritomo Gakuen issue centers on the Osaka Prefecture's approval of a new elementary school, and the Ministry of Finance's Kinki Finance Bureau and Prime Minister Abe have nothing to do with it.
It is just that Kagoike mentioned the names of Prime Minister Abe and his wife during the negotiations.
Most importantly, the land Moritomo Gakuen was about to purchase was the "Osaka Airport Noise Lawsuit site.
Since the site was noisy with airplanes flying overhead, the government was forced to buy and make it state-owned land.
Toyonaka City, on the other hand, wanted to turn the area into an educational district since the Osaka College of Music was being built nearby.
Therefore, the city bought the land next to the land Moritomo purchased from the national government to turn it into a park.
This land was purchased by Toyonaka City for 20 million yen, a 98.8% price reduction in real terms, with a whopping 1.4 billion yen in subsidies from the government.
Furthermore, Toyonaka City purchased the nearby land for free by offsetting the subsidy, reducing the price by 100%, and is currently using it as a school lunch center.
Perhaps Kagoike knew about the nature of this kind of land, or maybe he was negotiating for a lower price, and at the stage where the price was reduced by 86%, the Asahi Shimbun reported that the price was "unnaturally discounted."
However, Mr. Abe had absolutely nothing to do with this whole process.
Mr. Abe was utterly unaware of this process itself.
Suda.
Even so, the Diet is still pursuing the issue of molikake in this year's Diet session. In particular, the Moritomo Gakuen issue has sparked questions about the fault of the Kinki Finance Bureau and the former head of the Finance Bureau, Nobuhisa Sagawa.
Of course, Asahi is following suit.
How will you fight against the Asahi Shimbun, which has kept its stance the same?
Ogawa.
The complaint states thirteen times that my book defamed Asahi's reputation.
However, those 13 points are not disputed as "facts."
Suda.
What do you mean?
Ogawa
I am criticizing my "expression."
For example, as my impression of the Asahi article, I wrote: "For two and a half months, as shown in ...... and above, the Asahi Shimbun continued to report based on the testimony of Maekawa alone.
As anyone can read, this is a summary expression: "It is almost as if the paper had been running on Maekawa's testimony alone.
However, the Asahi Shimbun responded, "There is no fact that we reported the story based on the testimony of Maekawa alone.
It says, "We also asked that person, and this person's testimony is also included in the report.
Of course, that is true.
There is no way that Maekawa alone could have created a newspaper for two and a half months.
A person with normal reading comprehension would have understood that Asahi pointed out that they were relying on Maekawa's testimony even more.
However, Asahi is making this kind of accusation.
Hanada
The same is true of the example of the phrase, "Beating up on Abe is Asahi's company policy."
Asahi responded, "There is no such fact, and 'beating Abe' is not part of our company policy."
Suda
Of course, it doesn't (laughs).
Hanada
I don't have to say it, but I am talking about the fact that Asahi is beating Prime Minister Abe to such an extent that it is no wonder they say so.
This article continues
2024/5/25 in Kyoto
