Yomiuri Apologizes about Misinformation
Yomiuri Shimbun reported on the front page that the public prosecutors’ office was investigating fraud by a lawmaker with Japan Innovation Party (Nippon Ishin-no Kai) on August 27th. The next day, the newspaper carried an article that the fraud reported on the previous day was about wrong person and apologized about it. Yomiuri later ran an article of reviewing its misinformation which was made on preconception of a staff writer. It is very unusual mistake committed by a major newspaper in Japan.
Yomiuri reported that the Special Investigation Division of Tokyo District Public Prosecutors Office is making investigation on Taku Ikeshita (Osaka 10th district of House of Representatives, Ishin) with suspicion that his secretaries had received salary from national government with no record of working for Ikeshita. The report identified the secretaries as assembly members of Takatsuki city, Osaka.
It is prohibited for a lawmaker’s secretary to have another job, except a registration by the lawmaker. Yomiuri reported that those two reporters were found that they had not been registered as having job of assembly members in 2023 and quoted a comment of Ikeshita at the time that it was a mistake in paper work about hiring those secretaries and they had actually been working for Ikeshita.
However, the lawmaker to whom the public prosecutors were investigating was another one with Ishin. Yomiuri reported on August 28th that the public prosecutors raided offices of Akira Ishii (proportional district of House of Councillors). Below that article, Yomiuri published apology for the article about investigation on Ikeshita, explaining that the suspected lawmaker was Ishii.
Yomiuri ran articles about its internal investigation about the misinformation on the front page and another full-page on August 30th. According to the revision, the reporter on the issue had a perception that the lawmaker must be Ikeshita, given suggestion from the public prosecutors, but the reconfirmation was not sufficient. The editors could not find that perception of the reporter was not based on firm evidence.
Yomiuri has a principle to doublecheck information with multiple sources, and to decide not to publish the article which does not have credible evidence. Yomiuri argues that the lessons of past misinformation did not work on this issue. The newspaper company punished the writer, editor, director of the social division, the editor in chief and the managing director in charge of editing.
Yomiuri apologized to Ikeshita of its false reporting. Denying the fact reported by Yomiuri, Ikeshita demanded measures for restoring his honor as a lawmaker. However, it is unclear what Yomiuri can do to restore Ikeshita’s honor. It is ordinarily said that published misinformation cannot be corrected. Competition over news scooping and punishment on journalists about failing in reporting a news that all other organizations reported put pressure for reporters to write an insufficient article.
Comments
Post a Comment