「AFTERSTORY」というより「総集編」です。
しかし、他の番組の総集編とは意味が異なります。視聴者が抱えた疑問に対する放送局側の、あるいは政財界からの回答になっています。
一つには、犯罪を未遂で終わらせることで加害者の刑罰が軽くなるのはいかがなものか。再犯の危険性はないのかという疑問。これに対しては、「これから考えていかないとならないね」といういかにも役所的な回答。
もう一つは、「国家に監視されてもいいのか」という個人情報の取り扱い方や監視社会を危惧する疑問。これには答えていない。答えはミハンが作られたという事実が物語っている。政府や財界は個人のプライバシーや人権を守る気はない。犯罪撲滅という大義名分の下では政府や財界の言う「公」が優先されるというわけだ。
しかし、いくら監視カメラをつけても、「個人情報保護法」というザル法を作っても犯罪はなくならないのだ。犯罪は自然発生的に起こるものではない。犯罪を犯さなければならない社会状況が起こすのだ。監視カメラなどはその社会状況の改革と逆行するものである。グローバリズム、自由主義経済政策は、格差を作り、貧富の差を作る。犯罪の殆どが何らかの形でお金と結びついている。それを変えなければ、今後も犯罪は増えていくだろう。
第2の疑問に対する明確な回答を示さなければ、この番組は政府のプロパガンダとなってしまうのだ。
この特番で、みんながそれを考える機会を与えてくれたことに敬意を表するとともに、制作側は、みんながそれを話し合う場を設ける義務があると思う。
⟨impressions⟩
It's a "summary" rather than an "AFTERSTORY".
However, the meaning is different from the omnibus of other programs. It is the answer from the broadcaster side or from the political and business community to the questions that the audience had.
For one thing, how can trying to end a crime reduce the penalty of an assailant? Question whether there is no danger of recidivism. On the other hand, the program responded by saying that we must think about it in the future.
The other is the question of how we handle personal information, such as "Can we be monitored by the state?" The program does not answer this. The answer speaks to the fact that Mihan was made. Governments and the business community are not willing to protect individual privacy and human rights. Under the name of eradication of crime, the government and the business community call "public."
However, no matter how many surveillance cameras are put on, even if the "Personal Information Protection Law" is made, the crime will not go away. Crime does not occur spontaneously. A social situation arises in which a crime must be committed. Surveillance cameras go against the reform of the social situation. Globalism and liberal economic policies create inequality and the gap between rich and poor. Most crimes are somehow tied to money. If we don't change that, crime will continue to increase.
Without a clear answer to the second question, the show would become a government propaganda.
This special program pays tribute to give everyone the opportunity to think about it, and I think the producers have an obligation to provide a place for everyone to discuss it.
It's a "summary" rather than an "AFTERSTORY".
However, the meaning is different from the omnibus of other programs. It is the answer from the broadcaster side or from the political and business community to the questions that the audience had.
For one thing, how can trying to end a crime reduce the penalty of an assailant? Question whether there is no danger of recidivism. On the other hand, the program responded by saying that we must think about it in the future.
The other is the question of how we handle personal information, such as "Can we be monitored by the state?" The program does not answer this. The answer speaks to the fact that Mihan was made. Governments and the business community are not willing to protect individual privacy and human rights. Under the name of eradication of crime, the government and the business community call "public."
However, no matter how many surveillance cameras are put on, even if the "Personal Information Protection Law" is made, the crime will not go away. Crime does not occur spontaneously. A social situation arises in which a crime must be committed. Surveillance cameras go against the reform of the social situation. Globalism and liberal economic policies create inequality and the gap between rich and poor. Most crimes are somehow tied to money. If we don't change that, crime will continue to increase.
Without a clear answer to the second question, the show would become a government propaganda.
This special program pays tribute to give everyone the opportunity to think about it, and I think the producers have an obligation to provide a place for everyone to discuss it.
[スタッフ・キャスト等]
プロデューサー 永井麗子（共同テレビ）、関本純一
出演者 Season4に同じ
放送期間 2020年3月23日
放送時間 月曜 21:00 - 22:48
[]
