エルドリッヂ研究所代表・政治学博士　ロバート・Ｄ・エルドリッヂ

情報選択できない県民

偏向する２紙がシェア独占

　私は問いかけてみたい。沖縄のメディアはどうしてこうも極端で、作家の百田尚樹氏に「沖縄２紙を潰さないといけない」とまで言わしめたのだろうか。手短な答えは、琉球新報と沖縄タイムスの何年にもわたる日本新聞協会倫理綱領の不履行だ。ついでに、公正中立で偏らないニュースを買おうと購読料を払っている読者へのロイヤルティについても加えたい。

　両紙の編集局長は７月２日、東京の日本記者クラブで合同記者会見を行った。琉球新報の潮平芳和氏は「沖縄の新聞がもし世論を弄（もてあそ）ぶような思い上がった新聞だったら、とっくに県民の支持を失い、地域社会から退場勧告を受けていたことでしょう」と主張した。

　この声明は幾つかの点で間違いがある。第一に、沖縄県の人口増加にもかかわらず同紙部数は減少していることに言及しなかった。日本ＡＢＣ協会の２０１４年上半期調べによると琉球新報１６万３４７５部、沖縄タイムス１６万６２５部だが、数年前に比べ顕著に減っている。この傾向は他紙にも当てはまる。全国紙など紙媒体の読者の減少は別の情報手段によるものであるが、沖縄の場合は報道に対する不信によるもので、私は読者離れの事例を数多く知っている。

　第二に、潮平氏は２紙について触れなかった。沖縄本島で２紙合わせたシェアは９９％だ。５大全国紙と石垣島で発行されている中道右派の八重山日報などを合わせたシェアは１％しかない。このことが、２紙が情報操作をたやすくするという非常に好ましくない状況を作り上げている。

　二つの地元紙があるほとんどの地域では、１紙が中道右派で他方が中道左派の編集方針だ。ワシントンの場合、ワシントン・ポストは左派で、ワシントン・タイムズは右派とみなされている。読者は自分に合ったどちらかを選べばいい。小さな市場で２紙が同一のスタンスや構成を取ることは考えられない。この異常で不健全とも言える状況を説明するのが本論文の目的である。

　両紙によるシェア独占の理由は、沖縄が日本本土と距離があることにある。本土からの全国紙の配達時間の遅れ、輸送コストを含めた割高感、地元記事の不足、さらに県民所得が全国平均の７４％という事情が本土紙を不利にしている。もう一つの理由は、中高年の世代でインターネット普及割合が低く（ブロードバンドの普及率は全国平均７５％に比べ、沖縄は５９％）、紙媒体に今でも高く依存していることだ。紙の新聞の重要性は訃報欄を見ればわかる。沖縄では通夜・葬儀は何よりも重要度が高い。沖縄の新聞はお悔やみ情報の手段となっている。こうした死亡広告は高額で地元紙の大きな収入源である。

　さらに問題なのは、両紙の編集方針、すなわち、反基地、反軍、反日、反中央政府というスタンスは同一である。これでは読者にとって情報不足で沖縄県民は情報選択ができない。コメントや社説だけでなく、通常の報道記事にもこうしたスタンスが色濃く反映されている。これは、日本新聞協会が「報道は正確かつ公正でなければならず、記者個人の立場や信条に左右されてはならない」と謳（うた）っている新聞倫理綱領に反している。

　沖縄県民は本土の人々と比べて旅行や引っ越しが少なく、故郷周辺で過ごすケースが多い。加えて、複雑で密接な人間関係があり、集団思考の傾向が強い。集団思考や先入観の結果、沖縄の歴史に関する捏造（ねつぞう）がもたらされ、大学教授、活動家、左派政治家が中心になって「沖縄は差別された、犠牲者だ」と吹聴してきた（沖縄のメディアはこの文章に「差別だ！」と言うだろうが）。

　中でも歴史の捏造やそのような企図を推進するのは沖縄メディアだ。自分たちの価値観を推進するための事例、エピソード、切り口を常に探し続け、堂々巡りで自己満足な御神託を作り出している。こうした価値観に違和感をおぼえる政治家、政府官僚、経営者、学者、記者らが挑戦し立ち向かうことはますます難しくなっている。

　沖縄メディアは世論を「代表」していると主張しているが、「犯罪（commision）」と「削除（omission）」を通じて民衆を「扇動」しようとしているのだ。殊更、日本政府や米軍に関してはネガティブで、時に恥ずかしくなるような不正確な情報を提供する一方で、意図的に肯定的なニュースを黙殺している。その結果、国内及び外国メディアは沖縄メディアの偏ったニュースを抜き出して、しばしば事実確認をすることなく誤った主張さえ転載している。

　毎日、幾度となく繰り返されるこうした行為は地元メディアの反基地政策の一部で、政治家に圧力を加え、同調を仕向けるものとなっている。その結果、保守的な論調を「全体主義」と呼ぶ危険な発想を生み出しているのだ。

The Media Situation in Okinawa

Robert D. Eldridge, Ph.D.

　　　Over the course of several essays, I wish to discuss the unnatural state of the Okinawa media and political situation in Japan’s 47th prefecture, as well as touch on the recent “Hyakuta Incident,” which not only highlighted but also symbolized the problem with the media there.
　　　Before this, I want to ask the question, what makes the Okinawa media so extreme and so disliked by some around Japan to the extent that many, including which the well-known novelist and commentator Hyakuta Naoki to state, whether in jest or in truth, the need to destroy the two local newspapers?
　　　The short answer is the failure over the years of the two newspapers to honor the codes of the Japan Newspaper Publishers and Editors Association and I would add, loyalty to its readership who are paying subscriptions to purchase news that is impartial, fair, and neutral.
　　　Recently, the editors of the Ryukyu Shimpo and Okinawa Times held joint press conferences in Tokyo, and at the Japan Press Club on July 2, 2015, Mr. Shiohira Yoshikazu argued that they enjoy the support of the readers and if they didn’t, they would have already been “run out of town.”
　　　This statement is misleading in a couple of ways. First, he failed to mention that readership is actually down despite the consistently rising population of Okinawa (to the extent that there are strong rumors preceding the Hyakuta Incident that the Shimpo is in debt, which suggests the company might be using this incident to reinvigorate itself). For example, currently the Shimpo reportedly has approximately 202,000 readers versus the 207,000 of the Okinawa Times, but was previously higher. Of course, we can find that same trend nationally and internationally as well, where readers of print media are declining due to other sources of information, but I know many examples here in Okinawa where the decision to no longer read the local newspapers was made out of a conscientious statement of distrust in the reporting, essentially boycotting their purchase.
　　　The second misleading statement by Mr. Shiohira is the fact that the two local newspapers, a situation he did not raise. Together the two newspapers currently hold 99% of the local market share. For a variety of reasons, the five national newspapers, as well as the Yaeyama Nippō, a center-right newspaper from Ishigaki City, together make up only the remaining one percent. This creates a highly worrisome situation, in which information is controlled by the two local newspapers.
　　　In most places where two local newspapers exist, there is a tendency for one to be center-right and the other center left in its editorial policy. One example is Washington, D.C., where the Washington Post is considered to the left, and the Washington Times, is considered on the right. Readers of one political persuasion or another, or those who like a certain writing style or layout, etc., will tend to choose one of the newspapers. It is therefore highly unusual for two newspapers in a small market to be of identical stance and composition. Explaining this abnormal—and I would argue, too, unhealthy—situation is the purpose of this commentary.
　　　The reasons for their near-complete control over the market include the distance separating Okinawa from mainland Japan preventing the timely delivery mainland newspapers, their higher cost, and the lack of “hometown” news about Okinawa in the mainland newspapers, all of which cause potential readers in Okinawa (whose annual income is lower, only 74% of national average) not to buy mainland newspapers. Other reasons, especially strong in Okinawa with its senior population, is the previous lack of familiarity with the Internet (only 59% of the homes have broadband access, compared to 75% nationwide) due to its not having been readily available) and continued reliance on the print media. In addition, Okinawa is ranked last in the country for satellite television subscriptions.
　　　The importance of the printed newspaper is seen in the daily observation of the obituary page for information about the passing of friends, relatives, teachers, and others to whom the reader is indebted. In a small island like Okinawa, social obligations, such as attending viewings and funerals, are very taken very seriously. The newspapers still tend to be the place to go for reading this information, as well as placing it if the death was in your family. The local newspapers, as such, charge a high price for the placement of these ads, which is a significant source of revenue for them.
　　　Disturbingly, the editorial stances of these two newspapers, namely anti-base, anti-military, anti-mainland, anti-central government, etc., are also identical, as discussed above, which means there is a lack of choice and information for the readers and hence, the citizens of Okinawa as a whole.
　　　Moreover, in addition to serving as the basis for the commentaries or editorials, these stances are sadly also strongly reflected in the actual reporting in the newspaper if not serving as the driver of the story itself, thus being against to the ethical guidelines adopted on June 21, 2000 by the Japan Newspaper Publishers and Editors Association known as the Canon of Journalism, which stressed among many other standards that “Reporting must be accurate and fair, and should never be swayed by the reporter’s personal conviction or bias.” .
　　　In other localities, this might not be as serious a problem because there is access to additional information, such as the Internet and Social Media, but within Okinawa, due to its relatively low Internet use, it has been a hindrance to the population expanding its horizons and thus retaining its ignorances, prejudices, and biases. Moreover, Okinawans tend to travel and/or relocate less than their mainland compatriots, and will often spend much of their life in or near their hometown (this includes not only in reference to trips to the Japanese mainland, but within Okinawa itself). Furthermore, there is a greater myriad and complexity of social relations in Okinawa, which, combined with proximity, causes a tendency toward group think.
　　　The group think and above issues of ignorance, prejudice, and/or bias, has led to a series of narratives about Okinawan history developed by academics, activists, and like-minded politicians, to suggest that Okinawa has been (and continues to be) discriminated against and/or victimized, etc.
　　　It is particularly the Okinawa media that promotes this narrative and agenda, and constantly looks for examples, stories, or angles to events to prove their viewpoint, thus creating a never-ending cycle and self-fulfilling prophecy. Challenging this narrative or standing up to the media become more and more difficult for those politicians, government officials, business leaders, scholars, or reporters who believe or know differently.
　　　In contrast, the Okinawa media will argue that it is “representing” public opinion, but it actually tries to “lead” the people through commission and omission. The Okinawa media will publish information, which may not always be correct, that is negative and/or potentially embarrassing about the central government or U.S. military, while simultaneously withholding stories that might be seen as positive and lying about their actions to cover up the story. In turn, the national media and the international media pick up on these stories and republish these allegations, often without checking the facts.
　　　These actions, which are repeated numerous times daily, are part of the local media’s anti-base agenda, as with the pressure exerted on politicians and others to “toe” the line. The result is a dangerous mindset in Okinawa that one conservative commentator has called “totalitarianism.”
　　　Democracy can only exist with the freedom of expression and an informed public. When the media is biased and has an agenda, rather than being objective and a healthy, it not only fails to serve as an important and healthy fourth pillar (or “estate”) in society, but it becomes a destructive force. The Okinawan media is out of control, which is not only bad for Japan and the U.S.-Japan relationship, as well as for the U.S. military presence and security for the entire region, but also for democracy itself.

Eldridge was born in New Jersey, U.S.A., in 1968, and graduated from the Department of International Relations, Lynchburg College, Virginia. He earned his doctorate from Kobe University Graduate School of Law in 1999. From 2001-2009, he was a tenured associate professor at Osaka University’s Graduate School, and from 2009-2015, served as the deputy assistant chief of staff, G-7 (Government and External Relations), Marine Corps Installations Pacific in Okinawa. During this time, he was one of the proposers of Operation Tomodachi at the time of the March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami. He is the author of numerous works including The Reversion of the Amami Islands (2004) and The Origins of U.S. Policy in the East China Sea Islands Dispute (2014) and is working on several books about the current situation in Okinawa.