Let a hundred channels contend: Technological change, political opening, and bureaucratic priorities in Japanese television broadcasting

Journal of Japanese Studies

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 79-108

  Noble, Gregory W ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0141573027     PISSN: 00956848     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/133392     Document Type: Article

References (136)

1. Lonny E. Carlile and Mark C. Tilton, eds., Is Japan Really Changing Its Ways? Regulatory Reform and the Japanese Economy (Washington: Brookings Institution Press, 1998).
2. For an analysis of the possible benefits of increasing Japan's low level of new entry, see Douglas Ostrom, "The Search for New Corporate Superstars: Japanese Firm Mobility in the 1990s," Japan Economic Institute, JEI Report 12A, March 26, 1999.
3. Steven K. Vogel, "When Interests Are Not Preferences: The Cautionary Tale of Japanese Consumers," Comparative Politics, Vol. 31, No. 2 (January 1999), pp. 187-207. Industrial, as opposed to household, consumers (for example, automobile assemblers that purchase steel for use in their cars) are less restricted and may act more aggressively to obtain low-cost inputs.
4. Dennis J. Encarnation, Rivals beyond Trade: America Versus Japan in Global Competition (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1992).
5. Norman Frohlich, Joe A. Oppenheimer, and Oran R. Young, Political Leadership and Collective Goods (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1971).
6. This is by no means always the case, however. Some politicians possess or develop significant expertise. Tax policy is a famous example. Nor are bureaucrats always experts: elite bureaucrats in Japan are generalists who rotate regularly and often lack expertise in specific policy areas. The relative balance of expertise needs to be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
7. Koichi Nakano, "Becoming a 'Policy' Ministry: The Organization and Amakudari of the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications," Journal of Japanese Studies, Vol. 24, No. 1 (Winter 1998), pp. 95-117.
8. Steven K. Vogel, Freer Markets, More Rules (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996).
9. Erwin G. Krasnow et al., The Politics of Broadcast Regulation, 3d ed. (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1982);
10. George Wedell, "Prospects for Television in Europe," Government and Opposition, Vol. 29, No. 3 (Summer 1994), pp. 315-31.
11. Yūseishō (MPT), Tsūshin hakusho (Heisei 9 nenban) (Tokyo: Yūseishō, 1997), pp. 75-77, 268-69;
12. Shadan Hōjin Nihon Minkan Hōsō Renmei [Minpōren], Hōsō handobukku (Tokyo: Tōyō Keizai Shinpōsha, 1997), ch. 3;
13. Nishi Tadashi and Nomura Atsuko, Ta channeru hōsō no shōgeki (Tokyo: Chūō Keizai, 1997), pp. 7-8.
14. NHK, NHK nenkan '90 (Tokyo: NHK, 1990), p. 366.
15. Ellis S. Krauss, Broadcasting Politics in Japan: NHK and Television News (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2000).
16. Ellis S. Krauss, "Portraying the State: NHK Television News and Politics," in Susan J. Pharr and Ellis S. Krauss, eds., Media and Politics in Japan (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1996), p. 91.
17. Nomura Hidekazu, Nihon Terebi/Asahi Hōsō: masukomi no shakai-teki eikyō to sekinin (Tokyo: Ōtsuki Shoten, 1990), p. 72.
18. Krauss, "Portraying the State," p. 91.
19. Nishi and Nomura, Ta channeru hōsō, p. 5.
20. For a concise summary of the legal framework regulating broadcasting, see Yūseishō Hōsō Gyōseikyoku, Hōsō no shōrai tenbō (Tokyo: Gyōsei, 1992), pp. 116-17,
21. Kataoka Toshio, Hōsō gairon: seido no haikei o meguru, rev. ed. (Tokyo: NHK, 1990).
22. Minpōren, Handobukku, pp. 278-86;
23. Nomura, Nihon Terebi/Asahi Hōsō.
24. Nishi and Nomura, Ta channeru hōsō, pp. 5-15, gives a balanced account emphasizing the mutual dependence of key and local stations rather than hierarchical control;
25. for a chart detailing the source of programming at each station, see NHK nenkan '90, pp. 560-61.
26. Shimazaki Akihiko, 21 seiki no hōsō to maruchi media-ka (Tokyo: Gakubunsha, 1995), p. 184.
27. Itō Masaya, ed., Hōsō seido sono genjō to tenbō (Tokyo: NHK Publishing, 1976), p. 178.
28. D. Eleanor Westney, "Mass Media as Business Organizations: A U.S.-Japanese Comparison," in Pharr and Krauss, eds., Media and Politics in Japan, pp. 47-88.
29. See also Ōsono Tomokazu, Saishinban hitome de wakaru kigyō keiretsu to gyōkai chizu (Tokyo: Nihon Jitsugyō Shuppansha, 1997], pp. 78-81, 210-13.
30. Okuda Yoshitane and Noguchi Satoru, Shin kōkyō hōsōron (Tokyo: Hiro Puranningu, 1991), pp. 79-85;
31. Kataoka, Hōsō gairon, pp. 255-57;
32. Ito, ed., Hōsō seido, p. 285.
33. On the controversy surrounding initial spectrum allocation plans, see Hiramoto Atsushi, Nihon no terebi sangyō (Tokyo: Minerva, 1994), pp. 19-20, 85-86.
34. Nakano, "Becoming a 'Policy' Ministry," p. 106.
35. Kataoka, Hōsō gairon, pp. 147-53;
36. Minpōren, Handobukku, pp. 35-57.
37. Frank K. Upham, "Privatized Regulation: Japanese Regulatory Style in Comparative and International Perspective," Fordham International Law Journal, Vol. 20 (1997), pp. 396-511.
38. Minpōren, Handobukku, p. 40; author interviews at Minpōren, Tokyo, September 1997.
39. Minpōren, Handobukku, pp. 84-101.
40. Krauss, Broadcasting Politics; NHK nenkan '90, p. 330.
41. Some scholars and NHK executives emphasize NHK's legal independence and claim that the Broadcasting Law only gives the Diet power to recognize or consent to (shōnin) NHK's budgets and not to change their content (Itō, Hōsō seido, p. 230). Normally, the Diet passes the budget as submitted by NHK's Board of Governors but attaches a large number of resolutions. Most of the resolutions are boilerplate admonitions but others convey a degree of policy direction.
42. See, e.g., NHK nenkan '90, pp. 71-72. There is no question, however, that the Diet has discretionary authority over reception fees, on which NHK is almost completely dependent.
43. Kristin Kyoko Altman, "Television and Political Turmoil: Japan's Summer of 1993," in Pharr and Krauss, eds., Media and Politics in Japan, p. 170.
44. Nomura, Nihon Terebi/Asahi Hōsō, p. 67;
45. Shiga Nobuo, Shōwa terebi hōsōshi (ge) (Tokyo: Hayakawa Shobō, 1990), pp. 139-41.
46. Takahashi Kenji, Haibijon: NHK no inbō (Tokyo: Kōbunsha 1992), p. 112.
47. Okuda and Noguchi, Shin kōkyō hōsōron, p. 288.
48. Nomura, Nihon Terebi/Asahi Hōsō, pp. 4-13, 192.
49. Aoki Tadanobu, Nyū media no kōbō (Tokyo: Denpa Shinbunsha, 1990), pp. 76-80.
50. Author interview, Broadcasting Administration Bureau, MPT, Tokyo, September 1997.
51. Yūseishō, Tsūshin hakusho (Heisei 9 nenban), pp. 304-7.
52. Nomura, Nihon Terebi/Asahi Hōsō, pp. 19-21, 226-27;
53. Yūseishō, Tsūshin hakusho (Heisei 9 nenban), pp. 75-77;
54. Minpōren, Handobukku, pp. 68-70. Profits gradually declined from the 1960s through the early 1990s, but unlike the case in most other industries they recovered somewhat in the 1990s.
55. Minpōren, Handobukku, p. 70.
56. Nomura, Nihon Terebi/Asahi Hōsō, pp. 56-64.
57. Shiga, Shōwa terebi hōsōshi (ge), pp. 122-31.
58. Aoki, Nyū media no kōbō;
59. Takahashi, Haibijon: NHK no inbō;
60. Nomura, Nihon Terebi/Asahi Hōsō, pp. 65-75.
61. PHP Kenkyūjo, Nyū media handobukku '92 nenban (Tokyo: PHP Kenkyūjo, 1992), pp. 162-64.
62. Robert M. Orr, Jr., "Internationalization in Retreat Again? NHK Points the Way," Tokyo Business Today, Vol. 62, No. 11 (November 1994), p. 113.
63. Nishi and Nomura, Ta channeru hōsō, pp. 21-24.
64. Richard A. Gershon and Tsutomu Kanayama, "Direct Broadcast Satellites in Japan: A Case Study in Government-Business Partnerships," Telecommunications Policy, Vol. 19, No. 3 (April 1995), pp. 217-23.
65. Nishi and Nomura, Ta channeru hōsō, pp. 24-30;
66. Yūseishō, Tsūshin hakusho (Heisei 9 nenban), pp. 268-80.
67. Author interview, Sharp engineer, Berkeley, June 1994. While these comments are representative of white-collar males in their prime working years, overall viewing levels in Japan are similar to the high levels observed elsewhere. Minpōren, Handobukku, pp. 297-98.
68. Kawamura Masayuki, Dijitaru hōsō no makuake (Tokyo: Denpa Shinbunsha, 1997).
69. Author interviews at NHK and Toshiba, Tokyo, August 1991 and December 1996.
70. Thomas O. Bayard and Kimberly Ann Elliott, Reciprocity and Retaliation in U.S. Trade Policy (Washington: Institute for International Economics, 1994), pp. 116-19.
71. Chalmers Johnson, "MITI, MPT, and the Telecom Wars: How Japan Makes Policy for High Technology," in Chalmers Johnson et al., eds., Politics and Productivity: How Japan's Development Strategy Works (New York: HarperCollins, 1989).
72. Kanpō kōgai, September 21, 1993,
73. reproduced in Morihiro Hosokawa, The Time to Act is Now (Tokyo: NTT Mediascope, 1993), p. 31.
74. Nishi and Nomura, Ta channeru hōsō, pp. 18-20;
75. Shimazaki, 21 seiki no hōsō, pp. 56-107, 150-54;
76. for a historical overview see Aoki, Nyū media no kōbō, pp. 65-120.
77. Nihon keizai shinbun (hereafter Nikkei), December 4, 8, 10, and 12, 1993, and September 14, 1996.
78. Yūseishō, Tsūshin hakusho (Heisei 10 nenban) (Tokyo: Yūseishō, 1998), 2-2-2; 2-3-37; 2-3-38; 3-4-5 1C1;
79. Nikkei, September 14, 1996;
80. Nikkei Weekly, January 11, 1999.
81. Aera, March 17, 1997, p. 16.
82. Yomiuri, March 4, 1997;
83. Shūkan tōyō keizai, March 29, 1997.
84. Author interview, TV Asahi, Tokyo, September 1997.
85. Gregory W. Noble, Collective Action in East Asia: How Ruling Parties Shape Industrial Policy (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1998), ch. 5.
86. BS-4 Kōhatsuki Kentōkai, BS hōsō no dijitaru-ka ni mukete (Tokyo: Kurieito Kurūzu, 1997), pp. 100-103, 120-23; author interviews at NHK and Minpōren, Tokyo, September 1997.
87. Nikkei, March 18, May 30, August 18, October 21, and November 6, 1998;
88. on newcomer Star Channel, see Nishi and Nomura, Ta channeru hōsō, pp. 27-28.
89. Nishi and Nomura, Ta channeru hōsō, pp. 53-56.
90. Nikkei, May 21, 1998.
91. Nikkei, January 12 and February 10, 1998.
92. Kōdo-ka Bijon Kondankai, "Hōsō kōdo-ka bijon," advisory report to the director of the Broadcasting Administration Bureau, MPT, June 26, 1996.
93. Yūseishō, Tsūshin hakusho (Heisei 7 nenban) (Tokyo: Yūseishō, 1995), pp. 265, 291.
94. Noble, Collective Action, ch. 5.
95. Author interview, Broadcasting Administration Bureau, MPT, September 1997; author interview, JSkyB, Tokyo, April 1998.
96. Yūseishō, Tsūshin hakusho (Heisei 8 nenban) (Tokyo: Yūseishō, 1996), p. 173;
97. Yūseishō, Tsūshin hakusho (Heisei 10 nenban) 3-4-5-1a; author interview, JSkyB, Tokyo, April 1998.
98. Yūseishō, Tsūshin hakusho (Heisei 8 nenban), 3-4-1, 1.C;
99. Aera, March 17, 1997;
100. Nikkei, January 29, March 23, April 8, May 21, July 28, August 25 evening edition, December 26, 1998, and January 19, 1999;
101. Kawamura, Dijitaru hōsō no makuake, p. 97.
102. Kawamura, Dijitaru hōsō no makuake, pp. 9-21, 97, 121-27;
103. Nikkei, January 25, April 8, and September 29, 1998.
104. Author interview, Broadcasting Administration Bureau, MPT, Tokyo, September 1997; Nishi and Nomura, Ta channeru hōsō, pp. 81-86, 162-64.
105. Nikkei Weekly, July 20, 1998.
106. Nikkei, December 1, 1997.
107. Yomiuri, March 21, 1990.
108. Author interviews, Minpōren, Tokyo, September 1997.
109. Ta Channeru Jidai ni Okeru Shichōsha to Hōsō ni Kansuru Kondankai, "Hōkokusho," December 9, 1996;
110. see also the editorials in Asahi shinbun and Tokyo shinbun, December 11, 1996.
111. Ekonomisuto, September 10, 1996, pp. 46-51;
112. Oto Yoshihirō, "Shijō-ka sareru Nihon no media sangyō," Sekai, March 1997, pp. 185-97;
113. Shūkan tōyō keizai, February 22, 1997, pp. 108-11;
114. Nikkei, September 14, 1996.
115. Maruchi Media Jidai ni Okeru Hōsō no Arikata ni Kansuru Kondankai, "Maruchi media jidai ni muketa hōsō no tenbō: hōsō ga chūkaku-teki media to shite hatten suru tame ni," final report, March 29, 1995, not only admits a split within the committee over when to digitalize broadcasting satellites, but identifies the members of the opposing camps within the committee by name;
116. see also BS-4 Kōhatsuki Kentōkai, BS hōsō no dijitaru-ka ni mukete and Aera, March 17, 1997, p. 13.
117. Contrast these reports with the bland and muffled report issued in 1992: Yūseishō Hōsō Gyōseikyoku, Hōsō no shōrai tenbō (Tokyo: Gyōsei, 1992). It is possible that the degree to which conflict is aired reflects strategic manipulation by MPT. The ministry may stack the deck in its favor by picking only scholars for committees that are intended to challenge existing producers by issuing unanimous reports and allowing conflict to surface in diverse committees when it cannot bring the majority, particularly existing producers, to its side. However, the central point is that conflict and interests became more openly expressed and that social expectation of openness grew over time.
118. Roger G. Noll, "Economic Perspectives on the Politics of Regulation," in R. Schmalensee and R. D. Willig, eds., Handbook of Industrial Organization, Vol. II (New York: North-Holland, 1989), pp. 1253-87.
119. Chalmers Johnson, MITI and the Japanese Miracle (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1982).
120. See, for example, Tōyō Keizai Shinpōsha, ed., Zen zukai chūō kanchō no mitorizu (Tokyo: Tōyō Keizai Shinpōsha, 1998), pp. 9-28, 113-17;
121. for the evolution of plans toward MPT, see Nikkei, August 23, 26, September 2 (evening edition), and November 1, 1997. The reorganization plan eventually passed the Diet in the summer of 1999, to take effect January 2001. The reorganization merged MPT, the Home Ministry, and the Management and Coordination Agency to create a Ministry of General Affairs. The new ministry retained responsibility for broadcasting.
122. MPT officials portray the ministry as a consistently open and neutral arbiter, but NHK and Minpōren officials discern a significant change in stance and attribute it to the criticisms and challenges to MPT, as well as the ministry's growing realization of the magnitude of the technological forces transforming broadcasting. Author interviews, MPT and Minpōren, Tokyo, September 1997, and NHK, Tokyo, September 1997 and June 1999.
123. Yūseishō, Tsūshin hakusho (Heisei 9 nenban), pp. 304-7;
124. Nikkei Weekly, December 23, 1996, May 12, 1997, and January 12, 1998;
125. The Economist, February 3, 1996, pp. 53-55;
126. Paul S. N. Lee and Georgette Wang, "Satellite TV in Asia: Forming a New Ecology," Telecommunications Policy, Vol. 19, No. 2 (March 1995), pp. 135-49;
127. Wedell, "Prospects for Television in Europe," pp. 323-24.
128. Nikkei, January 29, 1998, February 21, 1998;
129. Nihon kōgyō shinbun, January 27, 1999.
130. Author interviews, Minpōren, Tokyo, September 1997.
131. Pharr and Krauss, eds., Media and Politics in Japan, pp. 366-67.
132. David A. L. Levy, "Regulating Digital Broadcasting in Europe: The Limits of Policy Convergence," West European Politics, Vol. 20, No. 4 (October 1997), pp. 24-42;
133. The Economist, August 7, 1999;
134. Wedell, "Prospects for Television in Europe." Even in the United States, the Federal Communications Commission played a political role in broadcasting.
135. Joseph Farrell and Carl Shapiro, "Standard Setting in High-Definition Television," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity (Washington: Brookings Institution, 1992), pp. 1-93;
136. Jeffrey A. Hart, "The Politics of HDTV in the United States," Policy Studies Journal, Vol. 22, No. 2 (Summer 1994), pp. 213-38.