-
8. Media Coverage of U.S.–Japanese Relations
- University of Hawai'i Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
243 8 Media Coverage of U.S.–Japanese Relations ELLIS S. KRAUSS U n t i l recently one of the important factors in the U.S.– Japanese relationship received little attention: the role of the mass media. Are the media merely the “messenger,” objectively reporting events that take place without making an independent contribution to the relationship? Or do the mass media make major independent contributions in determining the nature of the bilateral linkage? The answers to these questions are almost impossible to ascertain, but in this chapter I will argue that because the media are the medium, they affect the message, and because they are the channel, they affect the conflict. The structure and process of print and television news gathering and editing inevitably affect the presentation and content of news that each country receives about the other. Therefore, for better or worse, mass media are one of the major contributors to friction between the United States and Japan, and to its management. The main purpose of this chapter, then, will be to analyze how the structural differences between mass media in Japan and the United States affect the kind of news the two countries receive about each other and thus the relationship between them. The Medium Molds the Message Mass media perform two crucial functions in modern democracies such as Japan and the United States. First, they are part of the communication process among and between political elites. We often underestimate the extent to which political elites in a particular nation actually derive their information from the mass media and send (intentional and unintentional) signals through them to other elites.1 Certainly the same is true, probably more so, when it comes 244 Ellis S. Krauss to the elites of two different nations. Thus in addition to the actual process of negotiation between the two countries, the mass media are another important channel by which Japanese and American elites communicate with each other. The second major function the mass media perform in these democracies is to help shape the images of mass publics, including the popular images of other nations. These may not derive solely from the mass media, but undoubtedly the media contribute to the process of image formation by providing information and symbols that can be used to form images and/or to reinforce or disconfirm images derived from other sources. Although there are other sources of elite communication, such as personal contacts, and of mass image formation, such as family and school, the mass media are an increasingly important contributor, particularly in these media-saturated democracies. If this is the case, then the question of whether the mass media are merely a channel or an independent source of trade friction between the United States and Japan is moot: as an important channel of communication between and among political elites and as a major factor in the image formation process of mass publics, the mass media are automatically a major determinant of the relationship, because there is no such thing as a perfectly neutral and objective communication channel. Whatever the intent of the communicators, it is impossible for some form of bias not to enter into mass media news because the organization and process of selection, editing, and presentation of the news will affect the type of news that is presented. The media are neither the neutral messenger they claim to be nor the politicized, partisan, and ideologically biased force politicians often claim them to be. First, as discussed in chapter 3 of this volume , the selection, processing, and transmission that inevitably are part of the journalistic process are shaped first by the characteristics of the news organization, which in turn are influenced by the environment —legal, financial, commercial, and so forth—in which the organization operates. Thus, simply put, organization influences process , which shapes content. Second, far more important than personal political biases are the shared professional biases that derive from professional norms. These include the collective definitions of what “news” is and what it means to be “objective” and “professional ,” and beliefs about the proper relationship with a source, standards for good journalism, and the way to perform the technical aspects of one’s job. The different political and ideological biases of [44.210.240.31] Project MUSE (2024-03-29 11:14 GMT) Media Coverage of U.S.–Japanese Relations 245 reporters, editors, and publishers may cancel each other out within the same media organization or across various media organizations. The shared...