Question from the readers:
Does Announcer Sasaki Kyoko have a confidentiality obligation? Do you think she possesses any important information?
Considering Sasaki Kyoko’s Confidentiality Obligation
Recently, there has been a lot of discussion about Announcer Sasaki Kyoko, but what about her confidentiality obligations? As a broadcaster, it’s reasonable to assume she has a duty to maintain privacy and confidentiality regarding internal
information. However, it remains questionable how much information she actually possesses.
Between Self-Preservation and Responsibility
Given her position as the effective head of the news department, it seems unlikely that she would disclose the privacy of former employees. There must be strict rules in place for information management within the company, and unless it serves the public good, she likely cannot take actions to expose cover-ups. Therefore, while she may know certain things, it cannot be definitively said that she holds the key to crucial information. Moreover, there have been reports suggesting that she was a confidant for the victims, which raises questions about how much she knew regarding the company’s subsequent actions. Her absence from press conferences might also be due to instructions from executives. Considering her position as an employee, it is natural for her to prioritize self-preservation, and in that sense, she may be trying to fulfill her responsibilities as an employee.
Memorable Episodes
I recall that during her appearance on “Wide Na Show,” Announcer Sasaki spoke to the viewers as if she were confiding in a close friend. It was a moment that truly conveyed her personality and drew me in. It’s truly unfortunate to see her in such a difficult situation now.
We Want to Hear Your Opinions
There are many perspectives on this matter. What do you think about Announcer Sasaki’s position and actions? Please share your thoughts on her confidentiality obligations and how she manages information in the comments. I would love to hear opinions from viewpoints we might not typically consider.
