The Johnny’s sex abuse scandal and the role of media in Japan

ABSTRACT

The aim of this commentary is to shed some light on the sex abuse scandal of Johnny Kitagawa and his talent agency Johnny & Associates (hereafter “Johnny’s”). First, it looks at the role of the Japanese media during the scandal development. Here, the difference will be made between the “outside-media” (weeklies, foreign press) that were the first to expose the Johnny’s scandal, and the “inside-media” (dailies, TV broadcast) that were persistently ignoring the scandal. Largely owing to this, Kitagawa was able to sidestep allegations of abuse for decades. Next, the commentary touches upon the institutional power of the Johnny’s agency within the network of Japanese power circles. Importantly, this power-network becomes decisive in soft-pedaling the scandal, or fueling the hype. Further, it looks at the nature of structural exploitation at Johnny’s and the issue of whistleblowing in Japan. One section is dedicated to the issue of sexual abuse in Japan and the West. Next, the commentary offers a performance analysis of the Johnny’s press conference and points to the ritualized quality of televised confessions. Finally, it touches upon the issue of scandal consequences and offers two viewpoints on the aftermath of the Johnny’s scandal: optimistic (i.e. the scandal will change things for the better) and pessimistic (i.e. the scandal will not be much transformative).

KEYWORDS:

• Johnny’s
• Japanese media
• entertainment scandal
• sexual abuse
• social ritual

Introduction

If you follow closely what has been happening in Japan this year, you could have hardly missed the ongoing “scandal season”: the harassment scandals of kabuki actors Ichikawa Ennosuke IV and Kagawa Teriyuki, the adultery scandal of the popular actress Hirosue Ryōko, the political scandal of the LDP vs. the Unification Church, the geisha scandal of the Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Kihara Seiji, and the corporate scandal of the second-hand car dealer Bigmotor. The most shocking case, however, is arguably the child rape scandal of Johnny Kitagawa, the “father of J-pop” who was sexually abusing hundreds of members of his talent agency Johnny & Associates (hereafter “Johnny’s”) for more than half a century. The nature and background of the Johnny’s scandal will be familiar to readers everywhere, as serial predators are found in societies around the world. Yet the way this scandal has unfolded is a relatively Japan-specific phenomenon. This article seeks to deconstruct the Johnny’s scandal by analyzing the media logic behind the scandal process. Further, it describes the institutional power of Johnny’s within the Japanese power-network, and touches upon the topic of sexual abuse, whistleblowing and the role of #MeToo in Japan. Next, it looks at the way in which the Johnny’s scandal is constituted by the ritualized performance of all actors. The piece closes by discussing the extent to which Japanese society and its powerholders are being changed by the scandal.

Scandal description

The main narrative of the Johnny’s scandal centers on the figure of Johnny Kitagawa, who in 1962 founded the biggest Japanese talent agency, Johnny’s & Associates. Labeled as the father of J-pop, Kitagawa was a giant of Japan’s showbiz, credited with inventing the very style of boy band the country is famous for. Over his five-decade career at the helm of Johnny’s, Kitagawa created Japan’s biggest pop stars, including the boy bands SMAP, Hikaru Genji, Arashi, KinKi Kids, and KAT-TUN. These bands have infiltrated every corner of the mainstream and caused a massive fan following at home and abroad, while guaranteeing high ratings and interest. Kitagawa commanded a near-monopoly on male talent until his death at 87 in 2019.

The shock came four years after Kitagawa’s death. In 2023, it was revealed that Kitagawa had sexually assaulted young members of Johnny’s over decades. Allegedly, Kitagawa was luring starry-eyed boys and teenagers to his home, where he would sexually abuse and rape them. The majority of the boys stayed mute, because complaining about the abuse would mean missing out on their chance to debut. The scale of Kitagawa’s sex crimes (and the extent of their cover-up) has little precedent in modern Japanese history.

As a matter of fact, the scandal has much deeper roots. Accusations of abuse have been circulating since at least 1965, when the weekly Shūkan Sankei published a story including a quote from a Johnny’s member alleging that Kitagawa sexually abused him. In April 1981, the weekly Shūkan Gendai followed the case and carried a report from another victim abused by Kitagawa. The mainstream media, however, never picked up the story from the weeklies.

Since the 1980s, a number of books written by former talents from Johnny’s were published, containing accounts of abuse both experienced and witnessed. In 1988, Kita Kōji (a former member of the boy band Four Leaves) published a tell-all book “To Hikaru Genji”, in which he claims that Kitagawa had made sexual advances on the young boys. In 1996, Hiramoto Junya (another former Johnny’s junior) confirmed in his own book that he had witnessed Kitagawa force another boy into sexual intercourse.

The biggest exposure came in 1999, when the main weekly Shūkan Bunshun published a series of reports, titled “The monster of showbiz”, that detailed multiple allegations of the Johnny’s boys being raped by Kitagawa. Kitagawa sued the publisher for defamation, but the Tokyo High Court found some of the weekly’s claims of abuse to be true. And yet, the police did not file any charges while the mainstream media ignored the matter. One year later, the foreign media (The New York Times and The Guardian) reported about the allegations from Shūkan Bunshun, but this too was largely ignored by the domestic media.

In 2005, two more tell-all books were published by former Johnny’s members. First, Kiyama Shōgo lamented in his book that despite the great amount of publications on the topic, Kitagawa’s sex abuse was never reported by broadcasters, while Kitagawa was never punished. Second, Yamazaki Masato exposed in his book the sexual abuse by Higashiyama Noriyuki (a former member of Shonentai and currently the new president of Johnny’s) going back to the 1980s.

It was, however, not until 2023 that the allegations garnered the spotlight abroad. In March 2023, the BBC aired a documentary, titled “Predator: The Secret Scandal of J-Pop”, which included interviews with people who said they had been sexually abused by Kitagawa. Following the B.B.C. documentary, the mainstream domestic media outlets finally started to report on the issue. The NHK reported on the abuse on 13 April 2023, which was the first TV report on the scandal by the public broadcaster. Simultaneously, dozens more victims have come forward. Among them was the musician and former Johnny’s Jr. member Okamoto Kauan, who confirmed during his press conference in April 2023 at the Foreign Correspondents’ Club of Japan (FCCJ) that he too had been subjected to sexual abuse by Kitagawa on a number of occasions. This triggered a wave of similar allegations from former idols.

Okamoto’s confession was the last blow for the talent agency. On 14 May 2023, Julie Keiko Fujishima, Kitagawa’s niece and president of Johnny’s, issued a video apology to those who had alleged sexual abuse by Kitagawa. The third-party independent expert panel, which was hired by the talent agency in late May 2023 to inspect the case, concluded that Kitagawa indeed sexually abused minors for decades.

All these findings finally pushed Johnny’s to hold an official apologetic press conference on 7 September 2023. During the conference, Johnny’s formally acknowledged Kitagawa’s abuse for the first time. Fujishima resigned and Higashiyama took over as the president – despite the fact that he was separately accused of sexually abusing younger colleagues. In the beginning of October, Johnny’s held a second press conference, where it was announced that the agency had taken a new name (“Smile-Up”) and vowed to focus on compensation for victims of the abuse.

What follows is a brief timeline of the scandal development:

• 1962: Johnny’s agency established

• 1965: article mentioning sex abuse in Shūkan Sankei

• 1981: article containing victim report in Shūkan Gendai

• 1988: tell-all book exposé by Kita Kōji

• 1996: tell-all book exposé by Hiramoto Junya

• 1999: scandal coverage in Shūkan Bunshun

• 2004: another coverage in Shūkan Bunshun

• 2005: tell-all book exposé by Yamazaki Masato

• 2005: tell-all book exposé by Kiyama Shōgo

• 2019: Johnny Kitagawa dies

• 2023 March: scandal exposure in BBC documentary

• 2023 April: FCCJ press conference of Okamoto Kauan

• 2023 April: NHK scandal coverage for the first time

• 2023 May: a video apology by Julie Keiko Fujishima

• 2023 May: Independent Expert Panel established

• 2023 September: first Johnny’s press conference

• 2023 October: second Johnny’s press conference

• 2023 October: Johnny’s renamed to Smile-Up.

The role of the inside-media

In my new book Scandal in Japan (Prusa 2024), I analyze Japanese scandals as highly mediatized social rituals that manifest and manage revealed transgressions throughout Japanese history. More importantly for the Johnny’s context, I approach scandal as a composite product of interaction among Japanese power circles: the “iron triangle” of top politicians, bureaucrats, and businessmen (sei-kan-zai); the prosecutors (kensatsukan), advertisers (kōkoku gaisha), talent agencies (jimusho), crime syndicates (yakuza); and finally, the mass media (masukomi) as the “fourth estate” of power. Japanese mass media are chiefly represented by the “inside-media” (dailies, TV stations, news agencies) that belong to the restrictive Japanese Newspaper Association (Nihon Shimbun Kyōkai). In contrast, the “outside-media” (weeklies, monthlies, sports papers, local papers, foreign media, online platforms, independent journalists) are not members of the Association and exist on the periphery of the Japanese mediascape.

The inside-media are located in the “sacred center” of the iron triangle, from which they are supposed to monitor other power circles. In other words, they are supposed to function as “media watchdogs” who surveil authorities and expose their misconduct. During scandals, however, the inside-media function rather as a PR tool for the iron triangle, while it is the outside-media that attack the circles by exposing their corruption. In the meantime, the prosecutors and the police struggle to criminalize or minimalize the scandal. Depending on their personal motivation (financial, political, moral), Japanese prosecutors can time the arrest at the most inopportune time, feed the media with private leaks, and even forge the evidence (Prusa 2021a). The advertising and talent agencies attempt to manipulate the mass media in order to protect their clients, and the yakuza colludes with the iron triangle while putting pressure on the outside-media in case of negative coverage.

The Johnny’s scandal points to the fact that the inside-media gravitate towards their role as a silent partner of power. It is their natural inclination to select only “safe” issues that support the establishment’s objectives while distracting attention from deeper social problems. If a power scandal emerges, the inside-media are either forced to take it up, or they hush it up in order to maintain their image of impartiality. In other words, the inside-media do not cover, but rather cover up scandals. In the case of Johnny’s, the inside-media refused to report the allegations of abuse due to the long-standing cozy relationships that many outlets have with the agency (see the section below on institutional power). Largely owing to this, Kitagawa was able to sidestep allegations of abuse for decades.

Therefore, it can be said that the Johnny’s scandal was primarily a “scandal of the media”. The inside-media (or “muzzled watchdogs”) turned a blind eye to the gross human rights violations against minors because they chose cronyism (kone) and money (kane) over journalistic integrity and social responsibility. They were complicit in following Kitagawa’s orders, and they refused to investigate the weeklies’ stories of Kitagawa’s serial paedophilia. Even after the scandal broke, the inside-media have been alarmingly slow and timid in responding to it. If they covered it at all, they downplayed Kitagawa’s case as a mere celebrity scandal (i.e. human-interest story) while failing to see the abuse as criminal behavior (i.e. human rights issue). For instance, the majority of journalists asking questions during Johnny’s first press conference was represented by showbiz reporters, while the inside-media journalists were either silent or careful not to frame the scandal as a serious social issue.

Even after the exposure of Kitagawa’s crimes, the response of the inside-media was rather evasive: NTV and TV Asahi said that there were basically no plans to change the programming policy, while TBS, FUJI TV and TV Tokyo promised to make “careful decisions”, but failed to mention the appointment of Johnny’s performers to their programs (Yomiuri Shimbun 2023). In a similar vein, the public broadcaster NHK only announced that it would “take into consideration” the agency’s stance on respecting human rights (Yomiuri Shimbun 2023). TV Tokyo actually called on Johnny’s to mount its own investigation into the scandal, but no other TV operator came forward in support. One month after the BBC exposure, up to 57 Japanese TV programs still used Johnny’s artists as hosts, actors, or regular guests (McNeill 2023a). To many observers, the presidents of TV companies behave as if the issue of sexually abusing male teen idols was “not their business” (Asahi Shimbun 2023a).

A similar situation occurred in the corporate world. On the one hand, some big Japanese companies, including Asahi, Nissan, JAL, and Suntory, symbolically disassociated themselves from the Johnny’s agency and refused to use its talent for advertising. On the other hand, however, the majority of Japanese companies in advertising and sales promotion (around 80%) stayed mute, indicating that there were no plans for breaking their contact with Johnny’s (Yomiuri Shimbun 2023). This too indicates that Johnny’s may remain one of Japan’s most powerful entertainment companies even after the investigation confirmed the allegations.

The role of the outside-media

Scandals are no “epiphanies” – they are almost always “given” and never simply “born”, being produced by people with agendas and motivations of their own. In the Johnny’s scandal, the agenda of the inside-media was clear: to turn a blind eye and see no evil. The dailies either ignored the accusation altogether, or they steered toward the evasive “objective reporting” (kyakkan hōdō), which basically turned them into PR tools of Johnny’s.

On the contrary, the outside-media – in Japan most importantly the weeklies (shūkanshi) – are relatively free to indulge in speculative investigations because they do not belong to the Japan Newspaper Association and its restrictive kisha system. Thus, in Japanese scandal reporting, it is usually the weeklies who stress their role as “democracy watchdogs”, while the inside-media fail to live up to this role and keep silent when they are supposed to “bark”. This was also the case in the Johnny’s scandal. Indeed, the independent expert panel pointed to the “silence of the mass media” as the key issue in the unchecked spread of the abuse (Asahi Shimbun 2023d).

The editorial policy of the inside-media did not acknowledge the scandal because the original scoop in Shūkan Bunshun from 1999 (and again in 2004) was too sensitive in terms of displeasing Johnny Kitagawa, offending other power circles and threatening the status quo. In 1999, Shūkan Bunshun covered the suspected abuse for 14 weeks in a row, but even this was not enough to unearth a full-fledged scandal, because the inside-media never followed up and ignored the scoop. Kitagawa filed a libel lawsuit against the magazine and its publisher, but the Tokyo High Court concluded that key parts of the weekly’s report were true. Nonetheless, the agency refused to explain itself. Even when the BBC reporters were investigating the scandal in March 2023, they contacted Johnny’s, but also the police, entertainment reporters, music producers, newspapers, and commercial/public TV networks, but all these subjects refused to speak to the foreign reporters.

It was precisely the reluctance of the mainstream media to publish the corruption on the one hand, and the vigilance of the tabloid and foreign media to amplify it on the other, that contributed to the outcome of the scandal. There was little chance that the Japanese inside-media would report the issue, so Shūkan Bunshun calculated that if the foreign media covered it, the domestic media would follow (McNeill 2023a). I call this process a “bottom-up mediation”: the transgression is leaked via outside-media channels, which eventually pushes the inside-media to cover the case as well, transforming the original scoop into a proper scandal (Prusa 2021a). In Johnny’s case, the bottom-up mediation was informed by the “foreign pressure” (gaiatsu), in which foreign journalists (BBC) opened the case. Once the international media brought the issue of Johnny’s to light, Japanese dailies were forced to start paying some attention to the scandal as well.

Institutional power of Johnny’s

Talent agencies (jimusho) are one of the key actors in the aforementioned power-network. They operate on the entertainment market (geinōkai) and are spearheaded by Johnny’s, Yoshimoto Kōgyō and Up-Front. Johnny’s specializes primarily in “manufacturing” Japanese idols, but the company also wields enormous power with which it dominates other social institutions (see Galbraith and Karlin 2012; Marx 2012). According to David McNeill (2023a), there is no other example in the world of such a prominent infiltration of pop-culture industry by a single company.

Just like the advertisers, Johnny’s is untouchable by the TV stations in terms of negative coverage. If a celebrity scandal points at some of its idols, the agency attempts to control the gossip, eliminate leaks and minimize negative exposure. While monopolizing public broadcasting, Johnny’s can change the content of television programs and influence the way scandals are treated. The agency has control over whether its idols would appear on TV shows or grace the covers of magazines. This applies to former idols as well. For instance, in 2019, Johnny’s was pressuring commercial TV stations to avoid giving appearances to the former members of SMAP who had left the agency (e.g. Asahi Shimbun 2023c). Besides, the celebrities signed under Johnny’s are expected to strictly adhere to the agency’s rules and guidelines, including restrictions on dating, relationships, and personal freedom (see Galbraith and Karlin 2012). The celebrities are subjected to intense training and limited personal lives, which often leads to mental and physical exhaustion. Some celebrities alleviate this exhaustion by taking drugs, which becomes a large-scale scandal if exposed (see Prusa 2012).

The TV networks almost exclusively cover celebrity scandals, but if a major celebrity is involved, the networks are careful not to offend the talent agencies (i.e. Johnny’s) and the advertisers (i.e. Dentsu). The small-scale scandals (i.e. stories about whether an idol is dating or breaking up) are acceptable for the agency and the media who benefit from the publicity. However, large-scale scandals (e.g. celebrities taking drugs) are unacceptable for Johnny’s. To avoid these scandals, the agency protects itself by suppressing defamatory leaks and threatening the journalists to restrict their first-hand access to Japanese showbiz, or else the agency sues the tabloids for defamation. Finally, the most powerful talent agencies, including Johnny’s, are occasionally exposed as “clients” of the yakuza (see Adelstein 2019).

The institutional power of Johnny’s can be partly explained by the fact that the agency has successfully infiltrated the world of Japanese politics. Johnny’s has secured political power in postwar Japan by gaining access to, and patronage from, the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). Mary Kitagawa (Johnny’s older sister) had strong ties to the LDP and was a close friend of Prime Minister Nakasone Yasuhiro (Ito 2023). The political connection between Johnny’s and the LDP continues to this day: during the 2022 Upper House election, four showbiz organizations (including Johnny’s) announced their support for two official candidates of the LDP. After the scandal broke, the opposition politicians did set up a committee to investigate the case while inviting two victims to testify in parliament. Nevertheless, the opposition has little power on its own to change legislation because it is greatly outnumbered by the ruling coalition. It is likely that the government and the ruling parties will keep on functioning as bystanders in the Johnny’s scandal. At any rate, the issue of Kitagawa is not merely an entertainment industry problem. Rather, it concerns the “dark side” of postwar Japanese politics, including the collaboration and collusion between the talent agencies, the inside-media, the LDP, the police, the yakuza, and other players within the power-network.

Corporate ethic, whistleblowing, and sontaku

In order to better understand the long-term structural exploitation at Johnny’s, we should recall the traditional Japanese corporate ethic. It is typically one of opaque decision-making and hierarchy-driven culture which tends to prioritize internal corporate practices and backroom business relationships over public moral standards. The in-group norms become more effective than the overall legal framework, while subordinates prefer to stay mute rather than contradict their superiors. The members of a company’s founding families usually monopolize the power in Japanese management, and going against the wishes of the head of the family is unacceptable. These practices were confirmed in Johnny’s case by the expert panel, which saw the biggest problem in the “negative effects of family management”. The ongoing corporate scandal of Bigmotor is just another case of a warped family management in Japan.

To be sure, this corporate mindset is not limited to Japan. In the West, in-group norms and opinions about what behavior is right or wrong have more influence on people’s moral attitudes than actual laws do (Fontes 2022; Taub 2022). If some member defies conformity (e.g. by revealing sexual abuse), the community will react with disbelief, anger and ostracism (Asch 1956). Further, institutions both in the West as well as in Japan usually protect individuals who are perceived as high-value members of their communities (Asch 1956; Taub 2022).

Japanese corporate culture will not only make it difficult to avoid the in-group rules, but it will also treat harshly any signs of whistleblowing. This being said, whistleblowing is not rare in Japan. On the one side, the company’s “loyal members” may know about ongoing corruption, but they do not question it since they are under the normative control of top executives and family heads. On the other side, however, there also exist the “peripheral members” in every Japanese group (or company), who emancipate themselves from the normative control, and the bravest ones proceed to blow a whistle (Stockwin 2008). In the case of Johnny’s, the periphery was represented by the insider-whistleblowers (former idols and talent) who were circulating the gossip on the internal level for a long period of time. Unfortunately for Johnny’s, a dozen insiders dared to transmit the gossip beyond the confines of the company – and beyond national borders. Once the scandal went global, the whistleblowers attempted to re-interpret their character in the eyes of the public as that of “victim” (instead of “troublemaker”) of the Japanese entertainment system.

Finally, the inside-media’s complicity in the structural exploitation of Kitagawa can be explained by the phenomenon of sontaku. The term sontaku, or “governance-by-guesswork,” usually refers to a pre-emptive, placatory following of an order that has not been given (Carlson 2020; Lewis 2017). The practice of anticipating wants and needs is deeply rooted in Japanese culture, and analysis of the Johnny’s crisis confirms the sontaku explanation. It is likely that there were no direct orders of the media bosses to suppress the gossip. Rather, the orders existed only as a chain of servile presumptions about what Johnny Kitagawa might favor (cf. Wolfram 2017). The bosses were influenced by the belief that the powerful persona of Kitagawa will be displeased if they fail to do what they think Kitagawa wants (cf. Carlson 2020). The sontaku scandals usually appear within the political and bureaucratic discourse (e.g. the cronyism scandal of Abe Shinzō), but the Johnny’s scandal shows that even the entertainment discourse is corrupted through governance-by-guesswork. Those in the entertainment industry and the inside-media know that sontaku exists, and they behave according to those rules, but they avoid talking about it in public. Partly owing to the sontaku practice, Johnny Kitagawa successfully consolidated huge individual power in a media/entertainment environment that was, for decades, completely immune to his transgressions.

To be sure, the structural exploitation did not relate solely to Johnny Kitagawa: the scandal exposed a toxic work culture within the entertainment industry as such. According to a Ministry of Labour, Health, and Welfare survey from mid-September, more than 20% of Japanese actors have experienced sexual harassment at work (Asahi Shimbun 2023b). Many Japanese talent agencies have a similar business model as Johnny’s, so the Johnny’s scandal may be just the tip of the iceberg.

The issue of sexual abuse

The Johnny’s scandal also reflects some historical attitudes toward sexual abuse in Japan. The country has traditionally had a more conservative and collectivist culture which strives to preserve social harmony while avoiding public embarrassment, and this can influence how sexual abuse is perceived and discussed. In the male-centered Japanese society, where sexual harassment (sekuhara) remains widespread, people tend to be rather critical of those who stand up for the taboo topic of rape. The culture of silence over sexual abuse and the threat of shaming is one factor in explaining why the scandal went on for as long as it did – and on such a grand scale. Sexuality is usually seen as a private matter, making the topic of sexual abuse more stigmatized and less frequently reported. In the Japanese office environment, one is still told to humbly tolerate sekuhara and accept it as the norm (e.g. Aird 2018). Besides, Japanese victims usually face a backlash when they expose the sexual violence committed against them (see below).

In Johnny Kitagawa’s heydays, the age of consent was 13 (it was raised to 16 only in June 2023), while legally rape could only happen to a woman. At the end of the previous century, an “indecent assault” (kyōsei waisetsuzai) was considered a matter between men and women, while there was no real consciousness of male-to-male sexual abuse (McNeill 2023a). Men could make a complaint of sexual assault, but in the eyes of Japanese law, it just was not possible for a man to experience rape (Inman and Azhar 2023). This changed in 2017, when the country revised its Penal Code. The crime of “rape” was renamed to “forcible sexual intercourse” and male victims were included in the Code (Asahi Shimbun 2023c). Nonetheless, the prejudice within Japanese society regarding sexuality is still relevant: widespread public perception maintains that there is little difference between being gay and experiencing sex with an abusive older man (Inman and Azhar 2023, 2023).

Furthermore, blowing the whistle on a sexual issue becomes problematic in a country where the #MeToo movement has not really taken root. For instance, some former Johnny’s members reported the abuse to the relevant police bureau in the Tokyo Metropolitan Police Department, but the police refused to take them seriously (Ito 2023). Further, many victims of Kitagawa’s sexual abuse had actually spoken to the media in the past, but their stories were never published (Johnston 2023). Besides, those who speak up often face online abuse and victim blaming in Japan (Asahi Shimbun 2023a; O’Mochain and Ueno 2023). This was also the case of Johnny’s: the victims, who revealed the damage they suffered under Johnny’s rule, were trolled by Johnny’s fans who claimed that the victims were not chasing justice, but fame (McNeill 2023a).

The #MeToo movement got only minimum media coverage in Japan, but there is one exception to the rule, namely the rape scandal of the freelance journalist Itō Shiori from 2017. Itō used social media to accuse another journalist of drugging and raping her, but she was instantly vilified and flooded with hate messages. However, her hashtag #FightTogetherWithShiori soon started trending on Twitter, pushing other Japanese women to tweet about their own sexual assaults as well. While bypassing the inside-media, Itō gained some support from the public and eventually won a landmark civil case against the rapist (Prusa, forthcoming).

Considering all of this, for critics, Japan represents a culture of impunity for sexual violence and harassment. The country allegedly tends to be behind the West on issues of gender equality, sexuality awareness, and children’s rights (e.g. B.B.C. Worklife 2021; O’Mochain and Ueno 2023). Even after the scandal broke, there has been no real acknowledgement that children should be protected. Besides, many Japanese believe that inconvenience to others (meiwaku) should be avoided at all costs. This nurtures a climate in which voicing concerns about sexual issues is seen as burdening or impinging on others. In such a setting, sexual exploitation of men and boys is not only taboo – it is invisible (Azhar 2023).

Reading this section, one may get an impression that in terms of sexual abuse, everything is “fine” with the West, while Japan is behind. However, the West is not far ahead in addressing sex abuse scandals. There are still barriers and challenges when addressing this issue in the Church or in politics, while the entertainment industry has only recently become publicly condemned and prosecuted (Franz Waldenberger, pers. comm.). Historically, both the West and Japan have had instances of sexual abuse and misconduct (see Fontes 2022; O’Mochain and Ueno 2023). Further, both cultures have historically operated under patriarchal systems, where power imbalance and gender inequality can contribute to sexual abuse. However, sexual abuse scandals seem to be much more frequent in the West. Since the new millennium, multiple stories have broken about powerful or prestigious organizations in the West that tolerated or concealed serious abuse for years. This included the sex abuse scandals in religious institutions, sports organizations, private schools, the movie industry, and university campuses. For instance, in 2002, The Boston Globe revealed that the Catholic Church in the Boston area allowed sexual abuse of many minors by priests and ministers for years. In 2022, an elite Danish boarding school has been engulfed in a bullying and abuse scandal, while in the same year, the Southern Baptist Convention had covered up and enabled sexual assaults of parishioners. Equally alarming are the sex abuse scandals in sports. In 2016, the gymnastics team doctor Larry Nassar was charged with sexually assaulting hundreds of female athletes, while in 2011, the college football coach Jerry Sandusky was charged with 52 counts of sexual abuse of young boys. A culture of cover-up was also exposed in Hollywood, when the New York Times revealed in 2017 dozens of sexual abuse and rape allegations against Harvey Weinstein (see below).

The case of Johnny Kitagawa has drawn comparisons with Britain’s media personality Jimmy Saville, Australian entertainer Rolf Harris, and Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein. After Saville’s death in 2011, hundreds of allegations of sexual abuse were made against him. Just like in the case of Johnny Kitagawa, there had been allegations during Saville’s lifetime, but they were dismissed and accusers ignored or disbelieved. Rolf Harris was in 2014 convicted of the sexual assault of underage girls. He denied any wrongdoing but was sentenced to six years in prison, while the scandal effectively ended his career. Harvey Weinstein was sentenced to 23 years in prison, after more than 80 women made allegations of sexual harassment or rape against him. When the scandals of Saville, Harris and Weinstein were exposed, the media floodgates burst open and the reputations of the men were destroyed overnight. When Kitagawa died in 2019, the allegations stacked against him were largely ignored.

In the West, sex offenders are punished much more severely in the public eye than they are in Japan (e.g. West 2011). Indeed, the #MeToo movement symbolically annihilated countless famous personae (Harvey Weinstein, Michael Jackson, Jeffrey Epstein, R Kelly, Kevin Spacey, Bill Cosby, Jimmy Savile). The Johnny’s scandal has all the elements of a major #MeToo scandal, yet few of the consequences. In the West, the Johnny’s company would be immediately dissolved, but in Japan, the company initially did not even move to change its name. In order to have some transformative effect, the Johnny’s scandal would have to grow global, just like the #MeToo movement did. It seems rather unlikely, but the future will show.

The Johnny’s scandal hits the mainstream: The first press conference

The scandal climax usually comes in the form of a televised press conference (kisha kaiken). Generally, these conferences are used to announce a piece of sensitive information before it leaks somewhere else, or to officially denounce a transgression while symbolically separating oneself from the transgressor. The long-overdue press conference of Johnny’s was held on 7 September 2023, and its main aim was to publicly admit that the agency’s founder, Johnny Kitagawa, molested numerous aspiring idols. This was the first time in the history of showbiz that Johnny’s management has held a press conference. However, the Johnny’s representatives did not apologize spontaneously – they were effectively forced into a corner after the BBC magnified the case and more victims came forward.

Before analyzing the televised performance of Johnny’s representatives, we need to distinguish between three confessional strategies in Japanese scandal. The apologetic strategy (shazai no senryaku) is typical for celebrity scandals, where the apologizer fully confesses and admits responsibility. The defensive strategy (mamori no senryaku) is based on claiming innocence and downplaying accusations. Finally, the offensive strategy (seme no senryaku) includes counterattacking the accusation, filing libel suits, and suing publishers. The offensive strategy is used by those who wield unshakeable power and influence, and it was also the hallmark of Johnny Kitagawa: after being accused in 1999 by Shūkan Bunshun of systematically abusing young boys, Kitagawa vehemently counterattacked the accusation, sued the publisher (Bungei Shunjū) for libel and won damages in the Tokyo District Court in 2002.

The first press conference of Johnny’s representatives was a pragmatic combination of apologetic and defensive strategies. Formally, the conference was conducted as a proper purification ritual (misogi) with resignations, apologies, and tears. At first, Julie Keiko Fujishima (the resigning boss) and Higashiyama Noriyuki (the new boss) were following the standard confessional script while using a dozen ritualized clichés: they apologized (owabi) deeply (fukaku) for failing their responsibility (sekinin), causing disturbance (sōdō), worry (shinpai), and inconvenience (meiwaku) to citizens (kokumin), affiliates (kankeisha), clients (okyakusan), and fans (fan). While following the obligatory script, the representatives voiced their duty (ninmu) to conduct a further investigation (chōsa) and prevent recurrence of the conflict (saihatsu bōshi). They also indicated their gratefulness for learning a lesson (hansei), and asked for cooperation (kyōryoku) and support (sapōto) from the authorities. Fujishima knew that shedding tears and wiping one’s face during a TV apology is an effective way to sway public opinion. She started sobbing after one hour of being grilled by the journalists, which was the moment all photographers were waiting for. An emotional, tearful statement (i.e. the “tears test”) is essential to Japanese scandals and is given in order to signal that the transgressor is undergoing a “spontaneous” self-reflection (hansei) (Prusa 2021b).

At the same time, however, Fujishima and Higashiyama knew well that the most effective form of preserving the status quo is the defensive strategy (mamori no senryaku). Thus, the representatives claimed that they did not know about the transgression (shiranakatta, ninshiki shinakatta), they do not remember (kioku ni nai, oboetenai) or they cannot comment (komento wa sashihikaeru). This is not really compatible with the spirit of apology, but it serves as an effective strategy of denial in a scandal since the claim cannot be credibly challenged. Fujishima did apologize to the victims while promising reparations, but she failed to present a concrete plan for how damage would be recognized and compensation provided. Besides, the exclusion of Fujishima was rather symbolic: she will stay on as a representative director, and she plans to maintain her ownership of 100% of Johnny’s shares. In other words, Fujishima was signaling that, despite the scandal, she still wanted to stand at the helm of the Japanese entertainment industry.

The appointment of Higashiyama as the new head of Johnny’s was itself somewhat problematic. On the one side, Higashiyama reflected the archetype of “boss with feelings” (ninjō shachō) who indeed sounded like he spoke from the heart. With his tender voice and humble performance, Higashiyama had the advantage of being a professional actor, and may have served as an effective lightning rod for absorbing public indignation. On the other side, however, Higashiyama himself was actually polluted by his own sekuhara incidents going back to the 1980s (e.g. the “eat-my-sausage” incident). In 2005, one former member of Johnny’s (Yamazaki Masato) exposed the sexual abuse of Higashiyama in a tell-all book, loosely translated as “To SMAP and all Johnny’s talents” (publisher: Rokusaisha). When confronted with this sensitive issue during the press conference, Higashiyama claimed that he did not remember (oboetenai), or he blamed the alleged incident on “youthful indiscretion” (wakage no itari).

Higashiyama’s defensive statement that he had only “heard rumors” (uwasa) has raised serious doubts from the actual victims. However, the biggest blow for the victims was Higashiyama’s decision to retain the name of the agency, because it allegedly expresses the “energy and pride” that talents have cultivated over years. To many, keeping the company name with such a negative image equals to showing no regard for the victims and their lingering trauma. Moreover, Higashiyama failed to clarify the role played by Shirahase Suguru, Johnny’s vice president and PR manager who was controlling the media and protecting the agency from scandals. It was precisely Shirahase who contributed to the aforementioned silence of the mass media by banning inconvenient outlets while favoring loyal TV stations and sports papers (McNeill 2023a). Shirahase did resign, but he refused to show up at the press conference, which is yet another element of the defensive strategy.

This all must have provided further impetus to cynicism among the observers of Japan: the underlying realities of Japanese showbiz remain the same, and entertainment corruption is both pervasive and highly resistant to change. The powerholders are usually not motivated by any notion of public good – rather, they are driven by the desire to stay in power and/or enjoy their fetish. If they are exposed for corruption, they perform kabuki-like stunts: they assume their ritualized role, repeat a standard set of phrases, shed a couple of tears, and bow deeply in a shower of camera flashes. They may apologize, admit their share of “responsibility” (sekinin), but offer no new details despite mounting calls to explain themselves. In the West, “responsibility” is literally a duty to respond, while in Japan, the meaning is quite different: if you apologize in a docile manner and resign your position to show remorse, you have taken sekinin (McNeill 2023b). In other words, Japanese sekinin does not guarantee any profound transformation of the status quo or an overhaul of the corrupt company.

The second press conference

The public pressure on the company escalated significantly in the wake of the first conference. Johnny’s defensive strategy was met with harsh criticism, while the moral indignation of the public reached levels that the agency could not ignore anymore. In an attempt to turn the tide, Johnny’s conducted a second press conference on 2 October 2023. The agency announced establishing a new company, named “Smile-Up”, which will focus solely on reimbursing the victims and will be disbanded once it completes that work. In the meantime, a new company (yet to be named) will take on the role of talent agency.

These changes seem transformative, but critics have serious doubts about the agency even with a new structure. Most critical about the plans unveiled at the second press conference were the members of the newly established advocacy group “Johnny’s Sexual Assault Victims Association” (JSAVA). They insisted that Johnny’s activities should be discontinued altogether, while it was inappropriate for the agency to simply create a new entity to house its business (see e.g. The Japan Times 2023e). Besides, there will be no real change in leadership of the new company: Higashiyama will be the president, while the TV personality Inohara Yoshihiko will function as the vice president. Fujishima failed to show up at the second conference (i.e. she refused to perform another purification ritual), but in a letter read by Inohara, she said that she was never really close to Johnny while avoiding contact with Mary (i.e. she attempted to frame herself as being far away the polluted center).

Japanese press conferences are pre-scripted purification rituals with certain rules and limitations. It is therefore not surprising that the PR company, which was tasked with managing the second press conference, had a blacklist (“NG” list) of journalists to avoid calling on during the event (NHK News 2023). The NG list included names and photos of several reporters – both freelancers and dailies’ journalists – that were attending the event. Logically, the blacklisted reporters (including Mochizuki Isoko from Tokyo Shimbun) were disappointed and angry that they were not being given the chance to ask questions despite sitting in the front row. Instead of enabling these reporters to ask their questions, Inohara requested them to “adhere to the rules”, while the inside-media journalists, who were complicit in covering up the Johnny’s scandal, shouted angrily at the blacklisted reporters. Unsurprisingly, Johnny’s insisted that it was not aware of the blacklist (The Japan Times 2023b).

Public perception

Overall, the reaction to the Johnny’s scandal has been a mixture of surprise, disappointment, support, and forgiveness. Some segments of the Japanese public reacted with surprise after the scandal was fully exposed. This is partly because Johnny’s has maintained a wholesome image and a strong influence in the entertainment industry for decades. Others reacted with disappointment and anger, feeling betrayed by the behavior of Kitagawa’s agency. Fans invest time, money, and emotional support in their favorite idols, so when an entertainment scandal emerges, it may impact the fans’ trust and loyalty.

Theoretically, the negative public backlash should lead to a decline in popularity for the implicated talents. However, in the case of Johnny’s, the scandal seems to have little impact on the general public, while the idols’ popularity remains largely unaffected. Some fans may indeed feel disappointed, but the loyal ones continue to support the agency and its talents, notwithstanding the scandal. For instance, during the BBC’s person-in-the-street interviews in March 2023, one respondent described Kitagawa as “God”, while another one stated that he will continue to support Johnny’s no matter the scandal. Other respondents from the general public claimed that Johnny’s abuse was not something that they should pursue, or that they do not want to dwell too much on the subject – especially when Kitagawa is dead now (Inman and Azhar 2023).

Owing to the very high status that Kitagawa inhabits within Japanese culture, it seems difficult for the fans and general audiences to publicly acknowledge that he was a sex predator. Obviously, people were aware of the allegations of abuse, but they still tend to perceive Kitagawa primarily as a media mogul and architect of J-pop. These people believe in second chances and forgiveness, and they continue to back their idols during difficult times. Six months after the BBC exposure, the number of viewers who are interested in seeing Johnny’s idols was much larger than those who do not want to see them anymore (Asahi Shimbun 2023a). It seems that many Japanese are unwilling to accept or hear any negative comment about the “untouchable” agency.

This being said, the scandal has also led to public criticisms of Johnny’s, with various aspects being called into question. The management style, strict control, and controversial rules imposed by the agency have been criticized as contributing factors to the scandal. Some people complain about Johnny’s failure to present a concrete compensation plan, while others criticize the silence of the mass media in the Johnny’s scandal.

Needless to say, the media’s role in shaping public opinion is essential. Obviously, the Japanese media coverage has heavily influenced public sentiments towards Johnny’s. Ideally, the media should provide an objective coverage of the scandal, but in reality, they were more influenced by the power and influence that Johnny’s holds in the industry. Owing to this, both the media and the society treated Kitagawa’s sex abuse as mere gossip. Thus, there was no real sense of shock when the scandal erupted, as Kitagawa’s perversion was an open secret that people knew about (but no one did anything about it).

Scandal consequences

Let us now address a subject which bothers many Japanese scholars, namely the extent to which Japanese society and its powerholders are actually being changed by the corruption being unearthed. One feature shared by the majority of Japanese scandals lies in the low levels of social impact they make (Prusa 2024). Generally, scandals can be either transformative or regressive, but more often than not, they are regressive in Japan, usually having no lasting impact or social importance. They may represent spectacular media rituals, but in terms of consequences, they are non-transformative pseudo-events that have little power to prevent future corruption (cf. Boorstin 1992; Thompson 2000). Indeed, they create a media frenzy for a limited period of time, but by doing so, they actually highlight the media’s fundamental failure to bring about reform through scandal mediation.

It is too early to judge the social consequences of the Johnny’s scandal, but we can already choose between two positions: “optimistic” (i.e. the scandal will change things for the better) and “pessimistic” (i.e. the sandal will not be much transformative). Let us look at the optimists first. They emphasize that Johnny’s promised to strengthen governance with impartial experts and compensate some of the victims. Further, the agency will not take its usual cut from its performers’ earnings for the next year, while all the money for shows and other appearances will go to the individuals (Associated Press 2023). Moreover, Johnny’s representatives announced (during the second press conference) that they would rename the agency, which was perceived by some as a sign of change.

For the optimists, the agency’s promise to pay compensation to a wide range of victims represents a step forward, while the scandal could be a turning point in Japanese attitudes toward human rights and child abuse. In other words, the scandal may serve as a wake-up call for Japan’s lagging fight against sexual harassment. Indeed, signs are now emerging of a change in Japan’s attitude towards sex crimes involving minors. This was echoed by the top entertainer Kitano Takeshi, who proclaimed in May 2023 that the time of being able to speak up about sexual harassment has finally come to Japan. In the same vein, the commercial broadcaster NTV promised to go forward with the attitude that human rights violations such as sexual assault should not be tolerated (The Japan Times 2023c). In 2022, the Japanese government developed its own guidelines on human rights and started calling on companies to act (Asahi Shimbun 2023a).

Finally, the optimists believe that the mass media will no longer be allowed to continue doing business with Johnny’s without scrutinizing their past relations with the agency. Indeed, NHK will sign no new contracts with Johnny’s for its annual Kōhaku concert, which traditionally relies heavily on the agency’s talents (e.g. The Japan Times 2023d). Additionally, the optimists believe that Johnny’s will follow the expert panel’s advice and undergo a complete overhaul in order to become trustworthy again. Considering all these moves, there seems to be a great transformative potential behind Johnny’s exposure. Yet, the majority of Japanese are rather skeptical: one week after the first press conference, Yomiuri released a poll in which 72% of respondents think that Johnny’s cannot restore its trust (Yomiuri Shimbun 2023).

This brings us to the pessimists. They have serious doubts that the new Johnny’s management will be capable of fulfilling the agency’s promise to transform its organization and culture. Further, the appointment of Higashiyama, the central figure in the old regime, as a new president did not truly signal a break with the agency’s corrupt family management. Moreover, Fujishima was unable to give a definite timeline or plan to change the shareholder structure, and she will surely continue to operate behind the scenes.

The pessimists complain that there were no criminal investigations, because the exposure was not enough for the prosecutors and the police to be involved. The only significant transformation was changing the name of the company, but even here, critics complain that the name change should have been announced much earlier, while the company’s rebranding effort was slammed as “ridicule” (Yahoo Entertainment 2023). The name “Smile-Up” may work well within the popular culture of cuteness (kawaii), but it does not strike one as a suitable name for a company that is compensating people out of contrition and shame.

Logically, some victims (such as Shiga Yasunobu, the ex-member of the idol group Ninja) were also rather pessimistic, criticizing the organizational changes as “superficial”. To them, instead of being disbanded and bankrupted, Johnny’s simply covered the horrendous crimes with a bow and a name change. The press conference seemed to be a mere obscuration – a diversion tactic to create an illusion of change and manufacture a misleading pretense to deceive the public.

Many ex-members, however, seemed to be unmoved by the allegations. Torn between abuse and gratitude, many boys failed to speak out about the abuse while defending Kitagawa. They usually state that they knew the rumors, but they rather focused on improving their dance and making their debut. Some of them even perceived Kitagawa’s abuse as an expression of love (see Inman and Azhar 2023). Kitagawa’s behavior was clearly criminal, but even the parents of Johnny’s members actually encouraged their kids to fully submit to Kitagawa no matter the cost.

Conclusion

Kitagawa died in 2019 and was never charged, despite the fact that some of the allegations were proven in a civil court. Even in death, he is “protected”, because death halts prosecution, and because there will hardly be any new evidence. Moreover, Johnny’s cannot easily be uprooted because the agency is deeply embedded in Japanese pop-culture and the broader creative industrial complex (Brummer 2016; Brummer and Oren 2022). This was also reflected in Kitagawa’s massive funeral, which represented a national event that filled The Tokyo Dome. Even Prime Minister Abe sent a message of condolence, in which he described Kitagawa as a source of “courage and inspiration for all of Japan.” In the same vein, then deputy chief secretary Nogami Kōtarō paid tribute to Kitagawa for “leaving behind huge achievements in the Japanese entertainment industry.” This portrays Japan as a society that tends to refuse to face the truth and prefers instead to venerate an accused man even after his death. In cognitive science, this may be described as “denialism” (a person’s irrational choice to deny reality as a way to avoid a psychologically uncomfortable truth).

Higashiyama stated during the first press conference that the Johnny’s scandal is “the most foolish (oroka na) incident in human history.” Indeed, the revelation of Kitagawa’s crimes looks like a moment of history which shall transform the entertainment industry and deepen public awareness of human rights. However, once the bubble bursts and human forgetfulness kicks in, it is likely that the scandal will run out of steam while being overshadowed by other scandals. In other words, scandal fever will give way to scandal fatigue. The public will return to the mundane level of social reality, quickly forgetting the short-lived emotions during the scandal hype. In the meantime, Johnny’s will attempt to get this over with as soon as possible and go back to a new normal. The real message behind Johnny’s confessions was: we are sorry for the disturbance but we’ve got business to do. Or, as the only former SMAP star who remains affiliated with Johnny’s, Kimura Takuya, tweeted: “The show must go on” (Nikkan Gendai Digital 2023).

The myth of Johnny’s invincibility has been broken, but this does not mean that the agency will disappear. Johnny’s is down but not out (McNeill 2023a). Its legacy and business model may live on, its advertising power may remain intact, and the agency may keep on pulling the strings of media broadcasters. Once Johnny’s addresses the allegations sufficiently, companies are likely to work with the agency again. Indeed, media appearances of Johnny’s performers are set to be restricted for the time being, but the agency may later recapture the influence it wielded within Japan’s entertainment industry. Its performers will be less frequently seen on television now, but it is likely that after a certain period of time, the agency’s main promotional channels (TV and magazines) will again cast Johnny’s talents. Even now, many TV producers are inclined to play it safe, because they worry that they will lose the audience if they do not use Johnny’s stars (McNeill 2023a).

Japanese scandals in general, and the Johnny’s scandal in particular, are usually framed as a problem of one corrupt individual (“rotten apple”), but my research shows that Japanese corruption is more often rooted in institutional norms, cultural scripts and political structures (Prusa 2024). The Johnny’s scandal was not a problem of one rotten apple, but of a failed organization and corrupt industry. Indeed, the scandal becomes the all-consuming news for a limited period. The agency makes a tearful apology with deep bows and promises to change, but a few months later, the transgression is all but forgotten. Rather than transforming the status quo and ending the career of the agency, the scandal becomes part of a social ritual that enables purification and rehabilitation.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Igor Prusa

Igor Prusa is a Czech scholar in Japanese studies and media studies, currently affiliated with Metropolitan University Prague and Ambis University Prague. He worked at the Czech Academy of Sciences. Prusa received his first PhD in media studies at Prague’s Charles University in 2010. In 2017 he defended his second doctoral thesis at the University of Tokyo. His research interests include contemporary Japanese society, media scandals, and anti-heroism in popular fiction. His research has appeared in a wide range of publications, including Media, Culture & Society and Japan Forum. He is the author of a monography titled Scandal in Japan: Transgression, Performance and Ritual (Routledge 2024). Apart from his academic activities, Igor Prusa is a music composer in a Japan-themed band, Nantokanaru