Photo/Illutration Members of a Fuji TV third-party investigative committee, including its chairman, Akira Takeuchi, center, hold a news conference on March 31. (Yasumasa Kikuchi)

A report released by a third-party investigative committee looking into various problems at Fuji Television Network Inc. cast a sharp light on the low awareness of human rights within the entire company and its dysfunctional corporate governance.

The committee recognized that the sexual violence suffered by a female announcer at Fuji TV from now-retired entertainer Masahiro Nakai occurred as an “extension of business operations.”

The report also said network executives at that time immediately decided the problem was a “private matter” between the two individuals and their response to the attack was slow.

A senior company employee who invited female employees on a number of occasions for meals with Nakai did everything for the benefit of the entertainer, such as introducing a lawyer to him after the sexual assault.

The report criticized such actions as causing secondary damage to the announcer.

The report also pointed out widespread harassment throughout Fuji TV.

Gatherings as an extension of business operations were a common occurrence, and those invited were mainly young women selected due to their gender, age and appearance.

Such an atmosphere led to a number of cases of sexual violence and harassment.

The report also pointed out that the highly homogenous structure, in which mainly men were involved in the decision-making process, forced underlings to obey their superiors and created a dull sense of awareness about human rights.

The report said that under this corporate culture, harassment became acceptable.

Other organizations should draw lessons from such conclusions.

With such homogeneity and reclusiveness, corporate governance regarding the appointment of board members ceased to function under the influence of Hisashi Hieda, who served on the Fuji TV board for decades.

The report concluded that mistakes were repeatedly made because top management had fallen into shallow group thinking.

Even before the committee’s report came out, Fuji TV announced a reshuffling of its board members, including Hieda’s resignation.

Company President Kenji Shimizu, however, said the changes were made from a different perspective from the conclusions to be released by the third-party committee.

But can a genuine shakeup of management be carried out without seriously facing the incident in question?

The company tried to highlight the future diversity among top management through its moves to increase the ratio of women and to lower the average age of executives.

The question still remains on whether executives capable of improving human rights awareness in the company have been selected, as demanded by the committee’s report.

It is also unclear if the selection process matches the standard called for by the report.

When asked at a news conference about Fuji TV’s response to Nakai, Shimizu said the decision would be based on what the victim desires.

Respecting the former announcer’s intentions should naturally be expected. However, the analysis by the report of past responses at Fuji TV to suspected harassment must be considered very seriously.

The analysis showed that the “intentions” of victims were decided after they witnessed precedents and concluded they would be put at a disadvantage if they explained their experiences to company officials.

Can Fuji TV stick with an attitude that Nakai’s actions must never be tolerated? This will be a key test of the company’s seriousness in improving the psychological security of victims who consult about incidents as part of its intention to improve corporate culture.

Although he has retired from the entertainment world, Nakai also cannot avoid fulfilling his responsibility to explain himself.

Various similarities have been pointed out between Fuji TV and the sexual abuse that continued over many years at the former Johnny & Associates Inc. talent agency.

No company can be allowed to continue business operations by sacrificing the rights of its employees.

A recovery of trust will not be possible without an understanding and deep reflection on exactly what led Fuji TV to cause such disappointment among its business partners and society in general.

--The Asahi Shimbun, April 2

Related News