In past GNV articles, we have revealed various biases in Japan’s international news coverage. For example, according to an analysis of the 2015 volume of international reporting by major newspapers (Asahi Shimbun, Yomiuri Shimbun, Mainichi Shimbun), coverage of Africa and Latin America was exceedingly scarce, and even when the reporting on these two continents was combined, it was at the same level as coverage of just one country, France. Similar tendencies have been observed in NHK’s international coverage. Looking by topic as well, significant imbalances have been confirmed in areas such as armed conflict, major incidents, natural disasters, and religion. The gap between the countries and events that are reported and those that are not is extreme, and it is clear that the volume of coverage is influenced by factors other than the scale of the problems and harm. There is no shortage of major global events and issues that almost never become the subject of coverage.

From the situation seen in the articles above, one ends up with the conclusion that “poor countries are not reported on.” A similar tendency appears in another GNV article, and although the phenomenon of “poverty” is an extremely serious global problem, it is rarely taken up by the mass media. However, even if such a broad tendency can be seen, the reality is not simple. For example, there is also the reality that there is little coverage of major countries such as India, Brazil, and Indonesia, whose national GDP is relatively large. These countries, despite being major powers, are rife with poverty and have relatively low GDP per capita. It may be more accurate to say that what goes unreported is not “poor countries,” but “countries whose people are relatively poor.”

Photo: Radiokafka / Shutterstock.com

Behind this, one cannot deny the existence of latent discriminatory attitudes based on race and class; in addition, whether readers and viewers can easily “empathize” with the subjects of a report is also a major factor. The closer the race, ethnicity, language, culture, and standard of living/lifestyle of those being reported on are to one’s own situation, the easier it is to project oneself onto the event and take an interest in it. For example, people living in industrialized countries may find it hard to imagine or empathize with the lives and circumstances of people living in slums where poverty is rampant or in houses made of straw in arid regions. From this perspective, when it comes to coverage of victims of natural disasters, armed conflicts, or terrorism, it can be said that news organizations judge that audiences will be more interested if the place where it occurs is Europe, which feels familiar in terms of living standards, than the Middle East or Africa. Consequently, whether something is reported tends to be determined by socioeconomic status.

From the standpoint of whether audiences can empathize, another factor can be cited: country-centrism. This way of thinking forms one of the foundations of the policies of news organizations that operate nationwide. It is also a factor behind the fact that international news remains at less than 10% of total coverage, and it has a major influence on the content of international reporting. Countries with strong ties to Japan in areas such as security, trade, and tourism are more likely to be covered. This is why the United States, China, and the Korean Peninsula are always featured prominently. It affects not only whether something is covered, but also how it is covered. For example, when the King of Saudi Arabia visited Japan in March 2017, major Japanese news organizations focused on aspects such as business opportunities for Japanese companies in Saudi Arabia and displays of the king’s wealth. However, they rarely addressed serious human rights abuses inside Saudi Arabia, such as public beheadings, or issues such as Saudi airstrikes and the naval blockade in the Yemen conflict that have brought about large-scale famine.

Photo: zefart / Shutterstock.com

Moreover, for any accidents and incidents that occur overseas, as well as international awards such as the Nobel Prize and even space travel, whether one’s own nationals are involved is a major determinant of whether it is reported. In sports coverage, it is no exaggeration to say that the involvement and performance of one’s own country and citizens is the overwhelming factor in determining coverage.

A similar tendency can be seen in entertainment programs. For example, TV Tokyo’s program “世界ナゼそこに？日本人” is unusual in the sense that it is set in parts of the world that are rarely covered, but that is by no means its aim. It searches for Japanese people living in those places, exploring how they live and why they are there, and its homepage clearly states that the program’s purpose is “a documentary variety show that empathizes with the achievements of Japanese people overseas, instills pride in being Japanese, and cheers on Japan.”

The nature of events and phenomena, of course, also affects whether they are reported. Because news is inherently sensitive to sudden change, dramatic or sensational events are more likely to be featured. Just as in domestic reporting “deaths” from traffic accidents are more likely to become news than “deaths” from illness, “deaths” from armed conflict or terrorism are more likely to be covered than “deaths” from hunger. The phenomenon of “poverty” is, by its nature, difficult to feature. Also, when striking images that appeal to the emotions exist, the way something is reported may change. In the Syrian conflict, although many children have been killed, there was a case where the image of one injured child sitting expressionless in an ambulance happened to be captured on camera and was widely covered around the world.

Photo: Wellphoto / Shutterstock.com

However, the volume of international news is influenced not only by circumstances abroad, ties to one’s own country, and the nature of events and phenomena, but also by the nature and customs of news organizations themselves. For example, whether access to the scene of an event is easy becomes one factor. If they cannot arrive on the scene while the story is still “fresh,” the likelihood of coverage drops significantly. This is particularly important for television, a medium that uses cameras. Denial of entry and danger can also become barriers to access, but in most cases the key is the distance from a news organization’s base and transportation conditions. Temporary dispatches take both time and money. This is where the placement of correspondents and bureaus becomes crucial. Such placement reflects the long-term priorities and strategies of the newsroom. For example, NHK has set up few general bureaus in Africa and Latin America, which is clearly related to the paucity of coverage of these regions. If other factors align—such as a strong connection to one’s own country—any access issues can be overcome; but unless there are aspects that make a story a priority, access to the scene becomes a major barrier to international reporting.

As described above, there are various factors behind bias in reporting, and as a result, the current situation is that readers and viewers are receiving a highly skewed image of the world through international news. Conducting reporting based on “country-centrism” is not necessarily a problem in itself, but to understand the world it is also important to look at it objectively. In this age of globalization, where problems around the world are intricately intertwined, it is hard to believe that constantly averting our gaze from large parts of the world under the mistaken impression that “this has nothing to do with my country” will be in our own national interest. However, journalism that targets the entire world is costly. Readers and viewers, too, may need to recognize the importance of information about the world and signal that demand to news organizations.