Writing editorials a passionate process that sets major dailies apart

THE ASAHI SHIMBUN

To commemorate the start of a joint Web site operated by The Asahi Shimbun, The Yomiuri Shimbun and Nikkei Inc., a discussion was held involving the heads of the editorial boards of the three newspapers.

From left: Naoaki Okabe, Senior Executive Editor at Nikkei Inc.; Yoshibumi Wakamiya, Director of the Editorial Board at The Asahi Shimbun; and Toshio Asakura, Chairman of the Editorial Board at The Yomiuri Shimbun (THE ASAHI SHIMBUN)

Masumi Shiraishi

Naoaki Okabe

Yoshibumi Wakamiya

Toshio Asakura

The Japanese-language Web site, called A-RA-TA-NI-SU, can be accessed at <http://allatanys.jp.>

Taking part in the discussion and explaining the mind-set in writing their editorials were Naoaki Okabe, Senior Executive Editor at Nikkei Inc., Toshio Asakura, Chairman of the Editorial Board at The Yomiuri Shimbun, and Yoshibumi Wakamiya, Director of the Editorial Board at The Asahi Shimbun. The moderator was Masumi Shiraishi, a professor in the Faculty of Policy Studies at Kansai University.

Excerpts of that discussion are presented here.

* * *

Shiraishi: What was the main argument you were trying to make in your respective New Year's Day editorials? The headline for the Asahi editorial was "A year for a historic Lower House election."

Wakamiya: The political world has to be more stable because we have entered an age of many difficult problems, such as the environment and the economy. We argued that a Lower House election had to be held in order to create a new order.

Last year, moves by the Yomiuri led to talk about the formation of a grand coalition, but we feel it is unnatural to immediately move toward that goal. If the ruling and opposition parties are arguing that they represent public opinion in the Lower and Upper houses, respectively, there should be a so-called final showdown to settle the matter.

Another point is that with the Heisei Era now entering its 20th year, and despite various moves in the past toward realignment in Japanese politics, we feel that various issues will not be resolved unless there is a Lower House election to mark that milestone and conduct a thorough accounting of what has gone on in the past.

Asakura: The Yomiuri editorial carried a headline that said, "Prepare for changes toward a multipolar world." We are seeing once again the beginning of changes of a scale affecting world history as well as changes in the world's structure. The main thrust of the editorial was to encourage the public to think about how Japan should respond to such processes of change.

A major condition to accomplish that is to have a stable domestic (political) system. Without properly handling a new special measures law against terrorism, the prime minister will not be trusted even if he promises in the diplomatic arena to fight terrorism.

If a Lower House election were held now, we believe there is a strong possibility of the situation becoming even more complicated.

The ruling coalition will definitely lose its two-thirds majority (in the Lower House). Minshuto (Democratic Party of Japan) may face difficulties in taking over control of the government.

To say it in a slightly spiteful way, Mr. Wakamiya when you call for an early Lower House election it sounds like you are saying "A Minshuto-led government should be created as soon as possible."

Okabe: We decided to submit specific proposals to move Japan toward a low-carbon society.

The Japanese economy will not grow unless environmental issues are overcome. Conversely, dealing with the environment can be seen as a business opportunity. We felt there was a need to lay out a growth model for a low-carbon society by taking the stance that it is possible to achieve economic growth while also dealing with environmental issues.

Among the proposals we made were considering how to take advantage of Japan's technological expertise as well as arguing for the introduction of emissions trading to take advantage of the market.

Timing of Lower House election

Shiraishi: Mr. Wakamiya, there was a question about whether your call for a Lower House election now is preconditioned on Minshuto winning.

Wakamiya: I would like to return the comment. While Mr. Asakura's arguments are logical in their own way, it is nothing more than what the ruling coalition has been saying. I am under the impression that the paper has become like a party organ for the ruling party.

I also feel that it will not be easy for Minshuto to win. Under no circumstances are we making our arguments on the precondition that should the Lower House be dissolved now Minshuto would win.

However, in general terms, one of the major objectives for introducing the single-seat district system to the Lower House was to make it more commonplace to have a change in government. It is unusual in a democratic nation to have a single party control government almost continuously.

There are doubts as to whether Minshuto is better than the LDP. However, I feel there is the possibility that Minshuto will evolve into a more realistic party if it gains experience as the ruling party at some point.

I believe there should be an opportunity for a change in government because there will certainly be some aspects in which political decisions are made differently from those based on past constraints.

While I do not reject the fact that one reason to hold a Lower House election is because there might be the possibility of eliminating the current convolution in the Diet with a change in government, that is not the only reason.

Even if it does not win two-thirds of the seats, if the ruling coalition should somehow win that would mean that public opinion has once again picked the ruling coalition. In that case, it will naturally lead to greater cooperation between the ruling and opposition parties when such cooperation is called for.

Judgment based on policy

Shiraishi: In what ways do you think Minshuto still lacks the ability to take control of government?

Asakura: To put it sarcastically, (Minshuto head Ichiro) Ozawa himself said the very same thing. We believe that an important barometer is policy. The new special measures law to fight terrorism is one example. We believe this law is necessary for Japan to properly conduct international cooperation efforts; so that is our starting point in making our judgment.

Regarding the issue of the gasoline tax, we believe that confusion should not be brought about in an odd way. It would be better if gasoline prices and taxes were lower. But, since we believe that efforts should not be made to agitate the public in such a manner, that also serves as another barometer in judging Minshuto's ability.

As a result, we may be saying the same thing as the ruling coalition, but, for example, the Yomiuri was consistently critical of the economic policies based on market fundamentalism that were promoted by (then Prime Minister Junichiro) Koizumi and (state minister in charge of economic and fiscal policy Heizo) Takenaka.

We make judgments based on each separate policy and on that basis we cannot support the policies now proposed by Minshuto.

Shiraishi: Mr. Wakamiya, you said that public opinion had to be first tested and a grand coalition would be possible based on the results.

Wakamiya: While I did not go that far, if a grand coalition were to emerge as a result, it would have to be after a Lower House election.

Asakura: One thing wrong with the argument that "a grand coalition is acceptable after an election" is that no election is ever contested on the question of whether a grand coalition should emerge. For that reason, there is no difference to forming a grand coalition before an election is held.

The logic of a grand coalition is that rather than compete over policy for the sake of an election or highlight points of confrontation, it provides a forum in government for frank discussions to reach agreement on what the two sides believe is achievable. That is the case in Germany.

After the Lower House election, while there is a slight possibility of a grand coalition idea re-emerging, there is also the possibility of a medium coalition.

There could be the possibility of a new party being created and that party joining the Liberal Democratic Party and New Komeito in a ruling coalition. Speaking more boldly, the medium coalition could be one that excludes Ozawa.

If the situation should arise where the current ruling coalition loses its two-thirds majority, but maintains a majority in the Lower House, it will be too abstract to only hold expectations for the conscience and good sense of the other side.

I believe that more realistic moves will likely emerge.

Wakamiya: I did not say form a grand coalition after the Lower House election. Rather, in the event Minshuto does not gain control of the government after the election, the possibility of policy cooperation between the ruling and opposition parties or a medium coalition could still be viable.

Conversely, if Minshuto emerges as the leading party but does not gain a majority in the Lower House, it would have to form a new coalition if it wanted to gain control of the government.

I also disagree with Mr. Asakura's argument "it is wrong to form a grand coalition after the Lower House election."

In the case of Germany, a grand coalition was formed after a general election.

Minshuto came under criticism because mention was suddenly made about a grand coalition when the party had gained a majority in the Upper House and was preparing for a final confrontation in a Lower House election.

Observe economic reality

Shiraishi: Mr. Okabe, what are your thoughts on this matter?

Okabe: I feel that unless decisions about the political calendar are made after a careful examination of the actual current conditions of Japan's economy, the situation could lead to great confusion.

I feel there could be problems if things are hurried and an election is held amid circumstances that have suggested the possibility of Japan facing a crisis in March.

On the other hand, if a Lower House election continues to be pushed back, it will not be possible to take the next step in terms of policy. For example, the themes of taxation system reform and pension reform have to be dealt with as soon as possible, and if real discussions on those themes are to begin from around this fall, I believe there will be a need to measure public opinion in some form before fall and after the Group of Eight summit.

The present grand coalition idea leaves open the possibility of a conglomeration of populist sentiment that could lead to ballooning fiscal expenditures. I believe what should occur is a formation of political alliances based on policy.

I am reminded of what happened when Japan was facing a financial crisis. At that time, Minshuto took the stance of not using the financial crisis as a political card for its own advantage.

Shiraishi: What should be done now?

Okabe: I believe the ruling and opposition parties should hold discussions to smoothly pass the budget and related legislation in the Diet. While everyone would be happy if gasoline prices fell, that would lead to a huge hole in the fiscal situation. If overseas investors observe that Japan's government management has fallen into impotence, I believe that could be one catalyst triggering a March crisis.

Shiraishi: Has the market taken a pessimistic view of the current administration?

Okabe: I completely agree. I believe the reform efforts by Koizumi were insufficient. During the (Shinzo) Abe administration reform stagnated somewhat, but under (Prime Minister Yasuo) Fukuda there has been almost no message about reform.

Nikkei's pension proposal

Shiraishi: In the Jan. 7 morning edition, Nikkei released its own pension system reform proposal. What was the aim?

Okabe: The current system has become in some sense unworkable. Unless the system is reformed and the public is reassured about their future, we felt that the Japanese economy itself would face difficulties surviving. So we conducted research from many different facets.

While we referred to various systems, such as the ones in Sweden and Canada, in the end we came up with a basic pension program covered entirely by consumption tax revenues. Under such a program, a new consumption tax with a 5-percent rate would be needed. In exchange, there would no longer be a premium burden.

We reached the conclusion that such a system would be the most stable and sustainable. We hope the ruling and opposition parties use this as a catalyst to conduct proper discussions on pension and taxation system reform.

Shiraishi: Will the various generations, including ours, be convinced by your plan?

Okabe: I believe there will be dissatisfaction among senior citizens. However, those now receiving pension benefits, or people up through the baby boomer generation, have received considerable benefits under the present pension system. I believe there is a stronger sense of unfairness among the younger generations. There is a need to correct that somewhere along the way.

While the premium burden on companies will decrease by 3.7 trillion yen, our proposal calls on companies to also conduct systemic reform by converting their part-time workers into full-time employees or entering those workers into the company pension program.

Many points still to consider

Asakura: The Nikkei's proposal is completely different in significance from the Minshuto proposal. The proposal includes specific numbers such as a 5-percent consumption tax rate and 12 trillion yen so it can stimulate debate. In that sense it is epoch-making.

However, since it is a springboard for discussion, there are naturally points that still need to be covered. For example, in what to do about benefits during the transition period between those people who have already paid premiums as opposed to those who haven't, there seems to be a mixture of giving those who already paid additional benefits or making it so that everyone receives the same amount.

Also, taking the 12 trillion yen figure as an example, the range at which tax rates are decreased are also totally different depending on the category of items covered. I feel such parts of the proposal are somewhat ambiguous.

Moreover, I also believe that in the end there will be a need to also include medical care and special care for the elderly.

Shiraishi: In what direction should discussions on social security and taxes be taken?

Wakamiya: Since last fall, the Asahi has been presenting a series of editorials to help create a "society of hope" in which we have made bold proposals. Regarding the consumption tax, we wrote that the tax rate would have to be raised in the future as a revenue source for welfare programs and that the public would have to be prepared for double-digit rates in the future.

We have also taken on the pension issue, and just when we thought it was time to present our conclusions, the Nikkei came out with its proposal based on a tax plan.

While we have expressed our respect, to be honest, there have also arisen various questions among us.

While I do believe a tax plan is one way that is not very messy, there is also the possibility that during the transition period there could be considerable unfairness arising. Moreover, social welfare covers not only pensions, but also medical care and special care for the elderly, and there is an overall lack of revenues. Will it be possible to collect further premiums for medical care and special elderly care? Shouldn't taxes be used instead to cover those areas? We are planning on presenting our proposal while thinking about such issues.

Okabe: I am looking forward to it.

Wakamiya: I do not know if we can meet your expectations, but I believe it will be a slightly different proposal.

Work of editorial boards

Shiraishi: In principle, the papers carry two editorials every day, but how many people are involved in the writing rotation?

Asakura: I believe there are many common points among the national papers. At the Yomiuri, we have about 20 members on the editorial board, with three to four writers selected from the major departments, such as political news, business news, international news and city news. The themes are decided on by the chairman and three deputy chairmen of the editorial board depending on what is happening in the news. Since each editorial writer has a set range of topics, once the theme is selected, the writer is chosen almost automatically. However, the entire board discusses the issue to determine the specific content of the editorial.

Editorials represent the company's stance on issues and they are compiled through a group effort rather than by an individual. The editorial represents the viewpoint of the company.

Wakamiya: While there are no major differences with the Yomiuri, we have slightly more members on our editorial board. We have three editorial writers in Osaka and one each in Kyushu and Nagoya. We have tele-conferences with Osaka every day and the editorial is created through such discussions.

When there is a split in the discussions or a difficult judgment has to be made, the director of the editorial board makes the final decision in the end, but in principle, we decide by consensus.

Shiraishi: I feel there are slight differences in articles written by staff writers and editorials.

Wakamiya: Fundamentally, there is little room for opinion in reporting. However, there is nothing like "Since this is our editorial line, we cannot write any opinion that runs counter to that." In particular, outside writers are free to write whatever they want, even opinions that are at odds with the Asahi viewpoint. By-lined articles written by staff writers also have a considerable range of freedom. If that were not the case, the newspaper would not be interesting from the perspective of variety.

Okabe: At Nikkei, about half of the editorial writers also hold concurrent positions as senior staff writers. We actively seek an interchange of opinion among the news section and the editorial board, including through personnel moves. On important themes, we constantly exchange views in order to ensure that there are no major swings in opinion.

Shiraishi: I feel editorials are a forum to present an accumulation of extremely deep observation.

Okabe: There are many people with high vision (on the editorial board) and there are some people (who regard writing editorials as such a sacred task) who cleanse their body with a morning bath before coming to work.

Asakura: When the introduction of the consumption tax was a major issue, almost all newspaper and mass media organizations were opposed, but the Yomiuri resolutely took a stand in favor of the consumption tax. However, public opinion was overwhelmingly opposed so in our news pages there were many stories about how many people dislike having their taxes rise by even one yen. There are instances such as these in which there are differences in opinion and reporting in the paper.

Newspapers in Internet age

Shiraishi: I would like to hear your opinions about newspapers, including editorials and the arguments of newspapers, in the Internet age.

Okabe: I believe the role of newspapers in the Internet age is to write exclusives, opinion and analytical pieces. Scoops that uncover facts buried in history, such as the discovery of the memos kept by (the former Imperial Household Agency grand steward Tomohiko) Tomita, are extremely important. I also believe the role of editorials and analysis pieces in providing guidance during an age of turmoil will further increase.

Scoops and analysis pieces are two sides of the same coin. If newspapers no longer go after scoops, they will not be able to write in-depth analysis pieces and to make convincing arguments. That is a huge mission for and a characteristic of newspapers.

Asakura: Speaking only about editorials, the response of readers is quick and has increased recently. While editorials characteristically are better if they do not tag along haphazardly in line with public opinion trends, I believe they will have to be created with that in mind in the sense of referring to many different voices.

Wakamiya: In our April 1, 2004, edition, the Asahi ran an editorial on editorials and argued for the interest that could be generated by reading editorials in a comparative manner.

It ran about a year after the start of the Iraqi war so at the beginning of the editorial we quoted from a Yomiuri editorial that supported the start of that war. We made an effort to show Asahi readers that there was a considerable difference in the editorials.

This latest endeavor will make it easier to read and compare editorials on a daily basis.

Asakura: I believe that will happen every day.

Wakamiya: In a continuation of what I just said, this coming March will mark the fifth year of the Iraq war. The Yomiuri representative spoke very proudly of his paper's shining achievement in supporting the consumption tax. In marking the fifth year of the Iraq war, I am already looking forward to an appraisal of the paper's viewpoint that was in strong support of that war. (Laughter)

Asakura: Please look forward to it.

Shiraishi: We have had the opportunity to reconfirm that newspapers possess various roles, such as providing accurate reporting, maintaining a healthy sense of criticism, uncovering history and passing on culture.

(IHT/Asahi: January 31,2008)