2023 Statements and recommendations

Statement by BPO Director General on the Sexual Assault Cases Involving a Major Talent Agency (full text)

In March 2023, BBC’s news reports exposed facts of sexual assault at a major talent agency, raising an extremely serious social issue in Japan. Since September, the talent agency has held news conferences and stated that it has been working on its concrete measures. The path to a resolution is still not set; rather, one could say that the case has only reached its starting point. However, it is obviously an issue of great social concern, and BPO has received numerous opinions from the audience.
At the core of most of these opinions are shock and anger. However, with time, these opinions have shifted from attacking the perpetrator and the talent agency’s responsibility, to defending the talents’ human rights, and eventually to questioning the broadcast industry, mass media, corporate institutions, and the entire society for neglecting such a serious issue until now.
The audience expressed their hope that BPO would promptly begin its deliberation and take action to give a warning to broadcasters.
Acknowledging its public duty in society, the broadcast industry established BPO as a third-party organization that aims to improve broadcast content by listening to the opinions of the audience. There are three committees: the Committee for the Investigation of Broadcasting Ethics, the Committee for Broadcast and Human Rights / Other Related Rights, and the Committee for Youth Programming. These three committees examine the programs brought to their attention by the audience and investigate their production process, coverage methods, and content to determine whether they are problematic in terms of ethics, human rights, and effects on youths. Upon extensive deliberations, BPO issues a request to broadcasters in the form of a “warning,” “decision,” or “opinion” to reach a solution.
Considering the purpose of its establishment, it goes without saying that BPO has always taken the audience’s opinions very seriously. Members of each committee have taken considerable interest in the audience’s opinions on this case in question, and have held a series of discussions on how the issue relates to television programming.
Meanwhile, broadcasters have been airing programs verifying how they have dealt with the agency in the past and how they have handled the case since the facts came to light, and are also debating the issue in their respective program councils.
BPO’s primary goal is to contribute to the autonomy and independence of broadcasters, so it is paying close attention to each broadcaster’s actions.
The autonomy and independence of broadcasters contribute not only to the improvement of broadcast content, but also to the respect for human rights and freedom of every person in society, and ultimately leading to the improvement of the quality of Japanese social culture.
The problem in question is not just about the talent agency. It is also about how the various surrounding media and we as a society can protect and respect each person’s freedom and human rights, or in other words, how a mature civic society should be.
From the above standpoint, broadcasters will be expected to reacknowledge their public duty and seriously examine the facts and make improvements in case a problem of this degree of severity arises in the future, by thoroughly investigating and reflecting on this particular case. As a third-party that serves as a bridge between broadcasters and the audience, BPO will keep a close eye on each broadcaster’s actions. In order for the broadcast industry to perform its public duty which is based on the audience’s trust, BPO will continue to appropriately establish a forum for dialogue and exchange opinions.

2007 Statements and recommendations

Statement Regarding a Program Introducing a Diet Method (summary)

Since late January 2007, numerous complaints regarding the broadcast of a program introducing the “natto (fermented soy beans) diet method” were sent in to BPO by the audience. In view of the severity of the issue and BPO’s role in broadcasting, BPO Director General, Hideo Shimizu, released a statement on January 29th. It stated that the entire broadcast industry must deeply reflect and learn from the case, and requested all member broadcasters to make greater efforts to restore trust in broadcasting without the intervention of public authority. Following this statement, members of the Broadcasting Program Committee released a separate statement that included their opinion on: problems in the production system, the educational system of broadcasting staff, and the concern regarding the intervention of public authority in broadcasting. It also requested the broadcaster in question to make an independent and autonomous effort in making a full disclosure of the case and preventing future recurrence.

・Statement by BPO Director General
Statement regarding a program introducing a diet method(Full Text)
January 29, 2007

Statement

Broadcasting Ethics and Program Improvement Organization
Hideo Shimizu, Director General

The Broadcasting Ethics and Program Improvement Organization (BPO) was established as a third-party organization that serves to promote accuracy and higher ethical standards in broadcasting from an autonomous and independent standpoint.
Considering BPO’s mission and role, we are deeply concerned about the series of scandals in broadcast programs, particularly the recent case concerning the fabricated experiment data in “Hakkutsu! Aruaru Daijiten II,” produced by Kansai Television, Co. Ltd., for which not only the broadcaster in question but also BPO has been criticized by the audience.
There were similar incidents in the past, all of which called into question the broadcasters’ attitude and ethics, and which cannot escape the charge of lacking a sense of discipline and responsibility.
The social influence of broadcasting, especially television, is becoming even greater recently. Those who work in television need to be aware of this and act accordingly. If this situation continues, the audience will lose trust in broadcasting, and the freedom of broadcasting will be jeopardized.
The entire broadcast industry must deeply reflect and learn from the case, and we request that all member broadcasters make greater efforts to restore trust in broadcasting to deter the intervention of governmental power.

・Statement by Members of the Broadcasting Program Committee
February 7, 2007

Statement

Broadcasting Ethics and Program Improvement Organization (BPO)
Broadcasting Program Committee (Experts Committee)

The Broadcasting Ethics and Program Improvement Organization’s (BPO) Broadcasting Program Committee (Experts Committee) deliberate extensively from a third-party standpoint on various issues, from problems relating to broadcasting philosophy and ethics, to ways of coverage and production, at times holding a series of debates in line with specific cases.

The recent experiment data fabrication incident caused by “Hakkutsu! Aruaru Daijiten II” produced by Kansai Television, dismissed the fundamentals of journalism, betrayed the audience’s trust, undermined the credibility of the entire broadcasting industry, and jeopardized the freedom of speech, expression, and press.

The broadcasting industry has frequently caused some serious scandals in the past. Each time, the broadcaster in question apologized and vowed to prevent future recurrences, but the scandals occur again and again. Although each case differs, the reason for this recurrence may be due to underlying structural problems being created in the entire broadcasting industry.

We believe that in this case too, the problem does not only concern the broadcaster or production company or staff in question. It is important that we see this as a structural problem that lies in the entire broadcasting industry. On that premise, below are three points which we consider to be problematic. We hope that broadcasters will autonomously and independently make efforts toward the full disclosure and effective prevention of future recurrences.

The problem in the program production system
Currently, there is a shift toward labor division in program production. It has become common for a program to be produced with the cooperation of an external production company and passed on to numerous subcontractors, increasing the actual cost burden of the program production.

This labor division structure has brought negative effects on program production. External producers are often working against time, juggling numerous projects, and the production goes on without sufficient coverage and research.

Moreover, this labor division structure not only undermines television broadcasters’ production capabilities, but also impairs “quality control.” It is a bit of a stretch for an inexperienced producer or director to manage a program created by an external production company and also assess the quality and accuracy of the delivered program.

We fear that a consistent and detailed quality control is becoming difficult within such a program production system. The cause of this data fabrication case does not simply lie in the imprudence of some of the related parties. It is necessary to perceive this as a problem in the production system that is already in place within the broadcasting industry.

The problem in the employee training system
It goes without saying that broadcasting is a business based on the fundamental elements of democracy: the freedom of speech, expression, and press. Those who work in this industry have the right to enjoy this freedom, but this requires them to possess the appropriate knowledge and sense of responsibility.

However, these tend to be neglected in the current environment where operations are expanding, technology is becoming more complicated, programs are becoming more diverse, and the competition in audience ratings is becoming more severe. This “knowledge” and “sense of responsibility” will merely be nominal terms if each step of the production - from structural governance and legal compliance, to program planning, coverage, and editing, and strategic communication with interviewees - lacks concreteness and expertise.

Although each broadcaster has training programs, a genuinely viable training system that is also applicable to external producers is necessary.

We also hope that in the future, the broadcasting industry will develop a rich and highly professional training program tailored toward those with a certain amount of experience, in order to further deepen their knowledge.


The concern about the intervention of governmental power in broadcasting
We are under the impression that in the last year or two, there has been increasing involvement and intervention by the government / Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication in the broadcasting industry. Recent examples of their frequent intervention include the order issued to NHK by Internal Affairs and Communication Minister, Yoshihide Suga, to air more content on North Korea’s abductions of Japanese nationals, and the “strong warning” given to commercial broadcasters’ news programs and live sports broadcasts for their mishandling.

In this case too, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication has requested a “report” from Kansai Television.

Although both interventions are said to be based on the Broadcast Law and the Radio Law, these matters should be dealt with very cautiously considering the importance of freedom of speech, expression, and press, which form the foundation of a democratic society. It is not the role of the government to issue orders or provide punitive administrative guidance.

We believe that broadcasts that are sound and appealing are vital in creating a dynamic and mature democratic society. Whether it be about this particular case or the past wave of scandals, a structural problem seems to be the underlying cause and unless we dig deeper and a concrete action is taken to prevent future recurrences, we fear that this country’s democracy will be in danger.

Broadcasting Ethics and Program Improvement Organization

Broadcasting Program Committee (Experts Committee)
Yukichi Amano, Chairperson
Sanae Tanaka, Vice-Chairperson
Saeko Ishita, Committee member
Shinichi Ichikawa, Committee member
Tetsuya Kotaki, Committee member
Michiko Satonaka, Committee member
Tetsuo Shimizu, Committee member
Shinobu Yoshioka, Committee member

END

2004 Statements and recommendations

Statement Regarding the Administrative Guidance to Television Broadcasters by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (summary)

During July and August 2004, the three BPO Committees held deliberations regarding the “Administrative Guidance (strict warning) to Television Broadcasters” that was ordered by the Director General of the Information and Communications Policy Bureau on June 22, 2004. On September 21, a talk was held among the three Committee Chairpersons and the Director General. After their discussion about BPO’s response to the warning, it was concluded that this issue, which disrespects the Committee’s aim of protecting the freedom of speech in broadcasting, is of great consequence to BRC and BPO’s activities, and that it cannot be ignored. BPO decided to write a statement reflecting its opinions and countermeasures discussed in each Committee. Based on these deliberations, another talk among the three Committee Chairpersons and the Director General was held on November 11, in which the “Joint Statement by the three Committee Chairpersons” was accepted and made public at a press conference held on the same day.

Statement Against the Administrative Guidance to Television Broadcasters by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications(Full Text)
(November 11, 2004)
Broadcasting Ethics & Program Improvement Organization (BPO)

Broadcast and Human Rights Committee (BRO) Chairperson, Hiroshi Akuto
Youth Committee Chairperson, Toshio Hara
Programming Committee Chairperson, Shozaburo Kimura

In view of the importance of the public nature and social influence of broadcasting, the Broadcasting Ethics & Programming Improvement Organization (BPO) was founded with the purpose of handling complaints against broadcast programs swiftly and accurately from an autonomous and independent third-party position, while ensuring the freedom of speech and expression, and protecting the audience’s basic human rights in order to promote accuracy and higher ethical standards in broadcasting. (Article 3, BPO Terms) The three committees (Broadcast and Human Rights Committee, Youth Committee, Programming Committee) have earnestly conducted activities in order to fulfill this purpose, but the recent administrative guidance such as the “strict warning” given by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications seriously puts in danger the autonomy of broadcasting and trust toward the third-party organization.

Firstly, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (Director-General of the Information and Communications Policy) issued a strict warning to TV Asahi Corporation regarding their broadcast of a Diet session and a problem in the editing of an “irregular remark” (aka jeers). The Broadcast and Human Rights Committee (BRC) had already deliberated the issue based on a complaint made by Takao Fujii, member of the House of Representatives, and had concluded that it was a case of defamation, and warned TV Asahi Corporation to carry out the appropriate measures. Nevertheless, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications also issued a strict warning to TV Asahi Corporation, justifying their intervention by quoting BRC’s findings and assessments. Not only does this mean that TV Asahi Corporation was punished twice, but the Ministry’s action seriously disrespects the significance of BRC’s existence.

Secondly, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications issued a strict warning to TV Asahi Corporation and Yamagata Television System, Inc. for their broadcasts which lacked political fairness due to their insufficient attention during the editing process, and requested them to take appropriate measures to prevent future recurrences. Article 3-2 Paragraph 1 of the Broadcast Act does indeed stipulate rules applying to broadcasters’ editing of programs. However, the Posts and Telecommunications Ministry, the predecessor of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, stated itself that this rule is a “soft-prescription.” (Posts and Telecommunications Ministry “Analysis of issues to be considered in broadcasting-related laws.” 1964) The programs that received the warning were not entirely without fault. However, political news and freedom of speech are deeply intertwined, so the government must be especially careful when making any judgement on such matters. The issue of political fairness in broadcast programs is a subject of study at BPO, but we strongly request the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications to consider their stance carefully.

BPO was originally established autonomously by the broadcasting industry to serve the public by ensuring its right to access information through broadcasting, by dealing with complaints against television programs and entrusting an independent third-party committee to decide how to handle the cases to deter the control of state institutions or other governmental power. Whether this democratic institution functions successfully depends on the conscience of broadcasters and humility of governmental power.

Concluding from the deliberations held in each BPO committee and in view of the importance of the independence of a third-party organization and the autonomy of broadcasting, the chairpersons of the three committees of BPO hereby express our opinion on the recent administrative guidance of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications.

END

2003 Statements and recommendations

Committee Chairpersons’ Joint Opinion and Recommendation on Issues Concerning Audience Ratings (summary)

On October 24, 2003, Nippon Television Network Corporation announced that one of its employees had rigged its audience ratings. BPO considered this an extremely grave issue that touches upon the fundamentals of broadcasting ethics, and the three Committees debated the subject from various perspectives. Based on these discussions, a statement summarizing the opinions and recommendations by the three Committee Chairpersons was issued and made public at a press conference held on December 11, 2003.

・”Committee Chairpersons’ Joint Opinion and Recommendation on Issues Concerning Audience Ratings” (Full text)
December 11, 2003

BPO (Broadcasting Ethics and Program Improvement Organization)
Broadcast and Human Rights Committee (BRO) Chairperson, Hiroshi Akuto
Youth Committee Chairperson, Toshio Hara
Programming Committee Chairperson, Shozaburo Kimura

The incident involving the rigging of audience ratings at Nippon Television Network Corporation raised an extremely serious issue for BPO, whose purpose is to improve the broadcast industry’s autonomy and the quality of broadcasting culture. Using a part of the production budget to bribe rating monitors so that the producer can manipulate and raise the ratings of their shows, is an act of betrayal not just toward involved parties in the broadcast/advertising industries, but also toward the viewers and the public.

The three Committees at BPO have served as a “transparent channel” between the audience and the broadcast industry, handling complaints and criticisms, many of which strongly question the present state of the “ratings race.” Ratings should only be used to a limited extent, but as they have now come to play a decisive role in determining the advertising rate, the ratings race is becoming so fierce that it sometimes casts doubt on the decency of those in broadcasting.

The widespread vulgar programs in which the depiction of sexual and violent content goes too far, and news programs and talk shows that cause incidents of human rights violation, are often the result of such fierce “ratings race.” Advertisers who would rather sponsor programs that prioritize quality over ratings have often harshly criticized broadcasters who turn down their offer, saying that it will “lower the overall ratings of the company.”

Although audience ratings are currently the only objective data that can measure the amount of viewership, they are insufficient as a quality assessment standard, and the fact that broadcasters react nervously to a 1% difference even though there is a 2-3% margin of error in a sample of 600, indicates that ratings are not being used appropriately. Despite this, ratings reign supreme, and one cannot deny that they influence program production. The case in question is a reflection of such reality.

This incident occurred amidst growing distrust toward the media by the public and tightening of regulations by the government. Creators in the broadcast industry who endeavor to gain more freedom and improve the culture of broadcasting must take this opportunity to strengthen their autonomy and straighten the problem regarding the distortion of ratings to regain public trust in broadcasting. They must also reacknowledge the social mission of broadcasting and explore the potential of television through lively creations to fulfill society’s expectations.

From this standpoint, we propose the following and request that related parties proactively discuss these matters and take specific countermeasures.

・In order to change the current overdependence on audience ratings, programs should be evaluated comprehensively by the combined use of ratings and the “viewing quality survey” which is used to measure the quality of programs. It is necessary for the broadcasting industry to establish a new organ to deal with the viewing quality standard which NHK and each commercial broadcaster have been researching individually, and integrate their findings to create a new standard for measuring the quality of a program. A revision of the ratings system would be a structural reform that has bearings on the fundamentals of broadcasting, so the participation of those in the advertising industry, production companies, experts, as well as the audience and citizens is recommended.
・An active cooperation from the advertising industry is highly advisable. Advertisers and advertising companies also have a significant social responsibility for the quality of broadcasting culture. By fulfilling this responsibility, they too will be able to gain the trust of the audience and consumers.
・We would also like to stress the importance and necessity of an ethics training program to strengthen the autonomy of creators in the broadcasting industry. According to the investigative report by Nippon Television Network Corporation, the producer in question thought that “as long as the ratings were good, he could do anything.” This is how much ratings supremacy has managed to numb the moral values of those working in the industry. It also allows room for criticism over the suspicion of kickbacks from production companies. Tightening ethical standards at production sites will not be possible if the present situation is neglected.
・We hope that the audience and citizens actively voice their opinions. By criticizing programs, making requests, and encouraging broadcasters, they too can participate in this television reform. The audience is also a torchbearer of the broadcasting culture.
・We would like newspapers and magazines to be more critical in their program reviews and reconsider features such as the “Top 10 audience ratings” list, bearing in mind that these could amplify ratings supremacy.

・In Issuing the “Committee Chairpersons’ Joint Opinion and Recommendation” (Comment by BPO Director General)
・【Reference】Results of Questionnaire to Junior High School Students on the Ratings Issue