Question from a reader:
I’m curious about the rumors regarding Meiku Nagano. There are talks about her having relationships with two men, one of whom was reportedly married. If both of them had been single, would she have faced such criticism? Or would she still have been criticized for being involved with two men at the same time, even if they
Question from a Reader:
Is it possible that Masahiro Nakai is unaware of the contradictions in his own words and actions? I recently heard that he made a rebuttal to the third-party committee, asking them to disclose his hearing audio. However, the reason they couldn’t hear the woman’s side was that he refused to waive confidentiality. Therefore, his testimony was not
Recently, I’ve been reflecting on Masahiro Nakai’s rebuttal against the third-party committee at Fuji TV. The third-party committee is a voluntary organization established by companies to investigate internal issues with external experts, and it does not have legal authority. Therefore, it is true that there is no obligation to disclose
Question from readers:
I’ve been feeling that Masahiro Nakai may have acted inconsistently regarding his confidentiality obligations. When looking at the responses from the third-party committee from Fuji TV, the confidentiality aspect stands out as particularly concerning. Nakai’s side stated that “the matter of the closed room is not under investigation,” but in reality, the third-party committee only said it was
Recently, Nakai Masahiro’s issue with Fuji TV has been a hot topic. As I watched the news, I found myself feeling quite conflicted. The opinions regarding the contradictions in his actions are certainly understandable. In particular, I found the interpretations surrounding his refusal to lift confidentiality obligations to be quite fascinating.
Reader’s Question:
Why is it often said that celebrities are “not guilty because it’s not a criminal case”? Even though there are victims like Masahiro Nakai, who was hospitalized due to acute stress reactions and PTSD, and a third-party committee recognized it as a “serious human rights violation of sexual violence,” the public seems to treat it as “it’s fine because
Recently, there have been various opinions circulating regarding Masahiro Nakai being labeled as a “perpetrator of sexual violence.” I also have questions about the responses from Fuji TV and the third-party committee, especially after reading the report, which surprised me. The report states that “no actual circumstances were confirmed,” so it’s puzzling why
Questions from Readers:
Why do some people believe Masahiro Nakai’s claims? I don’t understand why he later asserts, “This is not sexual violence,” when a third-party committee has made a report that seems to contradict that. If they were lying, the involved lawyers would lose their credibility and it would affect their work. Furthermore, if there were issues with the report,
Question from the readers:
If Masahiro Nakai’s rebuttal is true, then the third-party committee must be lying, right? In that case, it would imply that they colluded with Fuji TV to make Nakai a scapegoat, and I believe sponsor companies should not be advertising with such a company, don’t you think? Moreover, it seems that it was the former president of
Question from a Reader:
I’m very curious about who is telling the truth: Nakai Masahiro or the third-party committee from Fuji Television. After undergoing a six-hour hearing, Nakai has made counterarguments, saying he was “interrupted” and “wasn’t listened to properly.” However, it seems to me that this implies one side is lying. The hearing should have been recorded, and with objective
