 Television workers examine election reportingIn reporting the November 2003 House of Representatives general election, major TV networks gave more time to coverage of the two "major" parties (the ruling Liberal Democratic Party and the opposition Democratic Party of Japan) . They allotted time according to the number of seats each political party held before the election. A study group of television workers, media analysts, and viewers published an interim report on how five news shows reported the general election at a meeting held on August 28 in Tokyo. The group pointed out that preferential treatment of larger parties in terms of allotted time may go against the principles of the Broadcast Law which provides that broadcast must be politically impartial and make clear, from as many perspectives as possible, concerning divisive issues. Voters were not provided with enough information because all the five programs reported less than half of the policies and viewpoints of each political party, the study group pointed out. Reporting that anchors and commentators on the news shows referred to an "election to choose a governing party," the group concluded that forcing voters to choose between the LDP and the DPJ had deprived them of a sound choice of political parties because they were uninformed about policy althernatives. Concerning the issues of the dispatch of Japan's Self-Defense Forces to Iraq and the revisions of the Constitution, the news programs deliberately pitted the LDP, Komei, DPJ, and New Conservative parties against the Japanese Communist and Social Democratic parties instead of depicting the confrontation as between the ruling parties and opposition parties. The study group warned that this way of biased reporting may narrow the range of voters' choice and neglect to reflect diverse public opinions. (end) |