My opinion of this week(515):
NHK should accept 20% cut of viewer payments
"The communications ministry abandoned plans to make viewer payments to
Japan Broadcasting Corp. (NHK) legally mandatory after the public
broadcaster refused to slash the fees by 20 percent, officials said
Thursday." Yomiuri March 2
Almost 30% of households of NHK viewers reject to pay viewing fee now and
it is serious situation for NHK at the moment. It started to happen after
series of scandals by NHK workers had been observed in recent years.
There is another reason why so many rejection of payments have been
observed. Under the present Broadcast Law, households with television
viewers must sign a subscription contract with NHK. But there is no clause
in the law which require viewer to pay the fee mandatory.
Under such situation, NHK must have asked the communications ministry to
revise the law so that they can collect the fee without so many troubles.
The communication ministry agreed with it. But top officials of the
ministry decided to ask NHK to cut 20% of viewer fee to exchange the
action to revise the law to collect the fee mandatory.
The Government authorities including the communications ministry must
have thought that such request to NHK to reduce 20% of viewing fees
is necessary to obtain consensus from people and to pass the law at
the diet. It seems that there is no concrete reason why reduction must
be 20% or so. It may be 20% or more or less.
There exists a number of complaints about management of NHK among general
public of Japan. Some believe NHK is not necessary any more. Some say
NHK is necessary but their current management should be improved in many
ways. I personally support the latter stance. I agree with the necessity
of existence of public broadcasting media such as NHK. But I also agree
with the idea that management of NHK should be improved drastically in
many ways. I believe that majority of Japanese people think that way as
well.
The request of 20% cut of viewer fee against NHK from the communication
ministry seems to be a kind of very minimum one. There are a lot more
requests to be included for the new law to pass the diet.
But President Hashimoto was very negative about the plan proposed by
Communication Minister Suga.
He said he should be very careful about such big reduction of revenue
which may give serious effects on the operation of NHK. That's for sure,
of course. Minister Suga expressed discomfort with it saying that they
would not submit the new law at this time. He said the plan to revise
broadcasting law is realized only when NHK agrees to reduce viewer fee
by 20 %.
I agree with this stance of the communication ministry. It seems that
there are a lot of rooms for NHK to improve their management of their
organization, although I don't point out it in some concrete way.
President Hashimoto should at least send more positive sign against
the plan shown by the communication ministry.
2007/3/3
Tadashi HAYASE
My opinion of this week(516):
Is Yasunori Kawauchi's assertion appropriate?
A lyricist Kawauchi Yasunori asked Shinichi Mori, a famous Japanese singer
to stop singing "Ofukuro-san (Oh, my mother!)" composed by Inomata Kosyou
and lyrics written by Yasunori Kawauchi from now on. "Ofukuro-san" is one
of the most popular Japanese song and one of the main repertories for Mori.
Since almost 30 years ago, Mori started adding some additional words before
singing the original part of lyrics by himself. He has continued such
performance from time to time since that has been accepted very well by
audiences.
Due to some emotional entanglement between Yasunori Kawauchi and Shinichi
Mori, Yasunori Kawauchi said Mori that he should not sing "Ofukuro-san"
itself, for Mori has sung the song improper manner for long time without
getting any consent from Kawauchi , the original writer of the lyrics.
Yasunori Kawauch'si appealed to JASRAC (Japanese Society for Rights of
Authors, Composers and Publishers) to clear legal right about what he
requested Shinichi Mori. In response to Kawauchi's request, JASRAC has
said Kawauchi's assertion is right in the sense that addition of some
words to the original lyrics by someone else is against the principle
of the basic right of Authors. If that is done, the identity of the
original lyrics would be impaired to some great extent.
But it's OK for Mori to continue to sing the song so far as he sticks to
sing the original lyrics. Several lawyers issued the comment saying Basra's
decision is basically right. Mass media reported the possibility of bringing
the case to the court decision by both parties.
I am not a specialist about the Right of Authors,Composers and Publishers
and not sure about what court decision will be made about this case. But
I think what JASRAC said is not necessarily right.
In any music concerts or show, singers often spoke something before he
starts singing songs. After they add some words, they start singing
original songs without changing the whole lyrics. What Mori has been
done for many years is the same kind of thing. He adds some additional
lyric like words before he start singing the original lyrics. Yes, it
involves some problems if he changes the original lyrics itself, but
he has not done it at all. Any of those added words seem not to impair
the original song itself. They rather work to improve the mood of the
whole song. So I really don't agree with the decision of JASRAC in that
respect.
I am not a professional about the law, so I don't know what will happen
about this case. The best way is that Yasunori Karachi admitted such
performance by Shinichi Mori without taking such legal action. But even
if the case is brought into the court, it is very possible that Basra's
judgment will be turned down from my point of views, which is rather
quite common and sound.
2007/3/10
Tadashi HAYASE
My opinion of this week (517)
How can ordinal citizen can drink \5000 mineral water?
It appears that only Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is willing to accept farm
minister Toshikatsu Matsuoka's foolish explanation about his massive office
utility bills. Matsuoka's political fund reports say his office spent
5.07 million yen in lighting, heating and water expenses in 2005 alone
and nearly 30 million yen in a five-year period to December 2005. It can't
happen because because the office is in the Diet members' office building,
which provide public cared , cost-free office space to lawmakers. How he
could prepare such expense report ?
The 5.07 million yen Matsuoka reported as his office's utility bills
represents 22 years worth of such bills for the average Japanese household
headed by a corporate employee. Asked such fact by opposition front at the
diet session, he said no men these days drink tap water. He prepared
some special device to improve the quality of running water and he drinks
some special mineral bottle water which cost \5000 or so. What a silly
explanation it is!
A few days after this comments, several lawmakers of Democratic Party of
Japan visited his office without any notice and found out the fact that
there is no such water device at all. That's quite a laugh as a matter of
fact.
Matsuoka's more critical comment is about tap water. According to news
reports, some hundreds of people protested his comments about tap water.
I want to make the same protest about what he said about tap waters.
I personally drink tap waters from time to time everyday. It is not really
so good but not so bad at all. But whether it is tasty or not is not a
big issue.
The most critical issue is whether it is safe to drink or not. Matsuoka
seems not like the taste of tap waters and he drinks \5000 bottle water.
That's fine.
But if he means to say he does not drink tap water because it is not so safe
for health, his comments is really serious. He denied the safety of tap water
which is provided by local government as public service. I personally
believe the safety of tap water because it is provided by public corporation.
How can such man like Matsuoka who is in such an important position of
Minister of Farm Ministry make such astonishing comments as to drinking
water?
He said he would withdraw this comment concerning tap water after he heard
a number of adverse criticisms. Since the start of Abe administration,
we have heard so many inappropriate comments stated by several moisteners
of Abe cabinet. This was just one of such silly comments.
Matsuoka shows no intention whatsoever of fulfilling his responsibility to cleanup
the suspicions with a convincing explanation . As such, he is not suited
to serve as a minister. His attitude also shows he lacks the moral integrity
to be a Diet member. Prime Minister Abe also should be criticized severely for
failing to take any action against Matsuoka.
There is criticism about how Matsuoka is responding to the allegations even
within the ruling camp. It seems there exists even no common sense in
politics. It is not the matter of law but the matter of moral and common sense
from our general public point of views.
Abe and the ruling coalition should make a sincere response to this issue.
2007/3/17
Tadashi HAYASE
My opinion of this week(518)
Safety of nuclear power station
A number of critical accidents at nuclear power stations which should have
been reported properly to Government authorities have not been reported
at all in many cases. This has become a big issue in recent news of mass
media.
Although there were some small accidents at nuclear power stations from
time to time in the past, no critical ones as such which have been reported
recently did not occur in recent years. The topic concerned with nuclear
power generation itself does not seem to draw so much so social interest
in recent years.
In addition, when it comes to issues on ecology, warming of earth by
carbon dioxide is a major problem to be solved. Nuclear power generation
is now considered to have good advantages in this respect. Owing to
this social atmosphere , management of electric power stations seems
to have lost some sensitivity concerning public relations on the safety
of nuclear power generation. This is why so many hidden cases of accidents
at power stations have been disclosed one after another these days. Some
mass media explained the case that way and I agreed with their analysis
to some degree.
Japan is prone to earthquakes. Observing so many critical accidents at
nuclear power stations these days, people may start having some basic
concerns about the safety of nuclear power stations. Are all those sites
safe enough if they are hit by such epicentral earthquakes like Hanshin
Awaji Earth quakes in 1995 ? But people in general seem not to have not so
much interest in this issue.
Local election is now starting. The election of House of Representative
starts in July. Some main political issues are on constitution, income
disparity, pension system and so on.
But according to my belief , this issue of nuclear power generation should
be another central issues in the election to decide the basic energy policy
of this country in the future.
2007/3/24
Tadashi HAYASE
My opinion of this week(519):
Making moral education a subject to be learned
Education Reform Council has proposed to make moral education a subject to
be learned at elementary school and junior high school. The proposal will
become a law after discussing at diet. Ruling parties will agree with
the plan but opposition parties such as Communist Party and Liberal Socialist
Party will disagree with making such law.
I personally agree with the proposal provided that further discussion is
to be made on the contents and the process before changing basic education
laws concerned. Because it is very obvious that the biggest disadvantage
about the present elementary school education is the lack of teaching moral
and ethic to live in a society. Some other basic subjects such as math and
Japanese language can be taught at any stage although it is a little bit
later on. But teaching of moral standards should be done at very early
stage such as 1st and 2nd grade at elementary school. The teaching must be
continued, of course, until the end of compulsory schooling.
Moral education can be done in any other main subjects such as social
studies and Japanese language without making it as special subject in
calicuram. Moral education has been done very complementally in that
respect until today.
Education Reform Council pointed out the fact and said that is not
enough. Their proposal concluded that moral education should become
one specific subject to be taught at school in order to improve moral
standard of children. I basically agree with that direction.
Once moral education become a subject in the whole calcium, the subject
must be evaluated in report card. A certain absolute evaluation such as
grade A, B, C, etc. will be made in report card. There exists some
serious concerns about it. People who are against such evaluation say
that how they can make such absolute evaluation where there is no
absolute concept of value in society. There exists a great variety of
values in this world according to the idea of those people who are
against such moral education.
I don't agree with that way of thinking at all. There definitely exists
a standard moral value to be used as definite criteria to evaluate
whether it is right or wrong. The biggest troubles and chaos at
school today derive from the lack of such basic moral standard. They
are not taught at all at school.
I know the background why some of those opposition front are against
to make such moral education at school. When they hear the word moral
education, they remind the moral education done at world war II. Japan
was destroyed by the militarism due to such wrong moral education.
No body including myself will never admit such moral education done
at last war time.
We should not keep such trauma any more. I believe that it is now
the time to set up a kind of good moral standard again in our society.
Moral education at compulsory school is very necessary to attain that
purpose.
2007/3/31
Tadashi HAYASE
English Home Page
Japanese Home Page