Published papers

This article examines the process of constructing policy legitimacy on nuclear power in postwar Japan, with the objective of identifying new sociological implications for journalism studies. Since an early stage -- particularly in the 1950s and 1960s -- the concept of "Peaceful Uses of The Atom" has frequently been used as an influential political symbol to legitimatize the policy of promoting nonmilitary use of nuclear power. Before the debate over nuclear power safety emerged in the 1970s, while the majority of Japanese people had strongly opposed the concept of "Atoms for War" in light of the fact that Japan was the first nation in the world to be bombed with atomic weapons, they earnestly supported the idea of "Atoms for Peace". That is why politicians, scientists and journalists had disputed over where to draw the line between peaceful and military uses, which constitutes the political spectrum over nuclear policy. There are three findings in this article. First, politicians, scientists and journalists had conflicting perspectives about the definition of "peaceful uses." On this, it is necessary to analyze where they draw the line. Second, negative labeling such as "nuclear allergy" and "pro-nuke agitator" often reflected the perception gap between those who attempted to broaden the definition of "peaceful uses" as much as possible and those who strongly opposed that broadened interpretation. Third, the process of constructing policy legitimacy on nuclear power depended not only upon the debate over "peaceful uses" as a legitimate symbol, but also upon recognition of the USSR as "friend /enemy." The majority of strong proponents of nuclear energy development were also anticommunists and often condemned the fact that progressive intellectuals had avoided criticizing USSR's nuclear tests. In conclusion, the article argues that it is important for journalism studies to develop a theory to analyze how journalists define what is a legitimate policy scope.