It is sad to say, but the most effective way to promote nuclear power stations in Japan has been propaganda. Even though we have realized how vulnerable they are to natural disaster after the great earthquake in 11 March 2011, we recently allowed a nuclear reactor in a different area from Fukushima to restart after the inspection. Did the argument of Japanese government supporting nuclear energy policy sound so strong? Or, are we Japanese easily manipulated? We are far away from the American ideal model.
Let's take a look at a famous theory of public relations; four historical models of public relations practice by J. E. Grunig (1984). He showed how public relations has developed from propaganda to more interactive way to send information to the people.
There are four steps. The first step is called "press agency model" where press officers send a message to the people in one way and the message is usually biased or untrue. The next step is "Public Information model" where the credibility of information is important although the flow of information is still one way. The third step is "Two way Asymmetric" approach where the organization receives a feedback for the people while it does not change its position. The most ideal model, Grunig assumes, is "Two way Symmetric" which urges the organization to change its position as a result of interaction with the people.
Because Japanese government has downplayed the accident in Fukushima, Public Information model would be rejected. If the government employed "Two way Asymmetric", nothing would be decided because the government does not have enough ability or time to listen to everybody including anti-nuclear activists. It would be easier to manipulate the silent majority. Like in UK, majority of middle class decides everything. Moreover, the government would not change its policy to support nuclear power, so "Two way Asymmetric" has to be dismissed.
 |
| Click the chart to enlarge. Extracted from here |
Japan has 54 reactors and nuclear power stations which generate 14 per cent of domestic electricity. The government says the nations have to save energy during winter; otherwise the country will suffer from serious shortage of energy for heating. The government seems to imply, “without nuclear power, we would die, we would lose the competition with China and Korea.” It’s a fear appeal from the theory of persuasion. As Curtin and Gaither (2007) point out, public relations in Japan is not separated from propaganda, manipulation has worked well so far.
However, press agency model will not last long. After the earthquake in Japan, the media disclosed the manipulative tactics of the government and the power companies. For example, the government had asked the power companies to look for somebody who speak out a favourable comment at a symposium about nuclear energy. Because of the manipulation, the opinion poll was relatively in favour of nuclear energy. Even after the earthquake, the government played down the accident. At first they estimated the level of seriousness as 3-4, and then admitted it was actually level 7, the same as Chernobyl.
According to the Guardian, British government also tried to play down Fukushima stressing the importance of preventing the incident from undermining public support for nuclear power. The disclosed email from one official to multinational companies says “We need to ensure the anti-nuclear chaps and chapesses do not gain ground on this. We really need to show the safety of nuclear.” Later, it was revealed that a new reactor was not designed for earthquakes of the magnitude of the earthquake in Japan. I assume manipulation is working well in UK as well.
Now the Japanese government is moving into Public Information model making use of statistics and estimates. It emphasises how ineffective the alternative energy is. The press release from the ministry of industry says if solar power is widely introduced to provide electricity consistently, it would cost 40 to 60 billion pounds by 2030. The government also argue that national parks for endangered species should be developed to set wind and geothermal power.
Simultaneously, Office for Nuclear Regulation filed Fukushima report to maintain the nuclear power plant plan in September 2011. It argues that the largest credible earthquake in the UK is around magnitude 6.5, much less than Fukushima (9.0) and that the maximum tsunami height around the UK would be a 1-2m increase in sea level. It tries to persuade the people by using credible source this time.
Following Grunig’s model, the government of Japan and UK may go so far to two way asymmetrical model. However, if they were forced to employ symmetrical model finally, it would be time to give up nuclear power station like Germany.
<Sources>
