Japan’s Wakayama Governor Refutes False Claims About Chinese Water Source Acquisitions

Japanese officials have refuted widespread claims that Chinese entities purchased most of Wakayama Prefecture’s water sources, labeling the information as false and potentially harmful to public discourse.

Wakayama Governor Izumi Miyazaki addressed the controversy during a Tuesday press conference, describing the viral social media claims as “misinformation and disinformation,” according to a Wednesday report in the Yomiuri Shimbun. The governor emphasized the importance of “promptly and widely disseminating accurate information” to combat false narratives, while pledging to “properly examine and investigate the matter.”

The misinformation originated from a June 20 broadcast of “For JAPAN Season 3,” an internet television debate program on ABEMA. During the show, a narrator claimed that “an investigation by a young prefectural assembly member found that seven of the nine water sources in Wakayama Prefecture have been purchased by Chinese individuals or companies backed by Chinese capital.”

This segment gained significant traction on social media platforms, particularly X (formerly Twitter), where posts featuring the narration were reposted over 10,000 times and viewed by 1.54 million users. Many posts ominously warned that “Japan is doomed” because of the alleged Chinese acquisition of vital water resources.

The Yomiuri Shimbun initiated an investigation in December, approaching both prefectural and national government officials, all of whom denied the claims. When questioned about the veracity of the report, ABEMA’s producer admitted that “the story was somewhat exaggerated” and that “the narration used overly assertive wording.”

Water resource expert Ryohei Yamashita, an associate professor at Ishikawa Prefectural University specializing in regional planning, told the newspaper that even with a broad interpretation of what constitutes a “water source” – including facilities, springs, or river headwaters – there was no evidence supporting either the existence of “nine water sources” or that “seven were purchased by Chinese interests.”

A representative from Wakayama Prefecture’s environmental health division further clarified the impossibility of the claims, noting that “rivers cannot be bought” and that there was no record of waterworks facilities, purification plants, or wells being purchased by foreign entities.

When pressed for evidence by the Yomiuri Shimbun, Cyber Agent, ABEMA’s parent company, took nearly a month to respond. On November 27, the program’s executive producer defended the broadcast, arguing that “it cannot be said that the opinion of the person who provided the information is 100 percent wrong” while acknowledging there is “no nationally defined standard for what constitutes a water source.”

However, the producer failed to provide any substantiating evidence for the assembly member’s claims about land purchases and admitted that “the narration was problematic.” Despite these acknowledgments, the producer indicated no intention to delete or correct the content.

In a comprehensive effort to verify the source of the claims, Yomiuri Shimbun contacted all 42 members of the Wakayama prefectural assembly who held office when the program aired. None of the assembly members reported conducting such an investigation or being interviewed by ABEMA for the program.

Tsukasa Tanihara, an associate professor of social informatics at Ritsumeikan University, provided context for why such misinformation spreads rapidly, noting that “issues involving foreigners tend to attract attention easily online.” Tanihara advised the public to “carefully distinguish between what is factual and what reflects the opinions of the person disseminating it.”

The controversy highlights growing concerns about misinformation in Japan, particularly regarding foreign investment and ownership of critical resources, and underscores the challenges media consumers face in distinguishing accurate reporting from sensationalized content.