What went right

BUSY with work at the moment, but a reader sends in this blog post from a native English-speaking foreigner in Japan with a small software business and a background as an engineer. The subject is what went right in Japan over the past few days. Judging from the comments, it puts the “reporting” from the U.S. and Great Britain in much-needed perspective.

For example:

“The overwhelming response of Japanese engineering to the challenge posed by an earthquake larger than any in the last century was to function exactly as designed. Millions of people are alive right now because the system worked…”

Another:

“All levels of the government, from the Self Defense Forces to technical translators working at prefectural technology incubators in places you’ve never heard of, spend quite a bit of time writing and drilling on what to do in the event of a disaster.”

That’s one reason why the Japanese don’t need to look to politicians at times such as these.

And:

“The story of Japanese railways during the earthquake and tsunami is the story of an unceasing drumbeat of everything going right.”

Also:

“(C)onsidering the magnitude of the disaster we got off relatively lightly. (An earlier draft of this post said “lucky.” I have since reworded because, honestly, screw luck. Luck had absolutely nothing to do with it. Decades of good engineering, planning, and following the bloody checklist are why this was a serious disaster and not a nation-ending catastrophe like it would have been in many, many other places.)

That isn’t to say there aren’t a few problems with the post. He incorrectly states that Honshu is larger than Great Britain. (It isn’t, but just barely.) He’s also incorrect to say that typhoon was originally a Japanese word. (The fact that tsunami is now an English word, and has been for decades, helps support his argument.) Some of it is a bit over the top in a software engineer sort of way, but all of us are what we are.

The comments are worth reading too. There’s the usual snark that comes with opening Internet sites to commenters. One guy thinks a million people are on the verge of starvation. A few others are upset because the Japanese are…well, Japanese, from what I can tell.

Here’s what some other people say:

“If you look at the way Japan reacts to crises like this you’ll see a one quarter dip in the economy and then a large bump in the economy due to the vast number of people being employed to review what happened, rebuild what washed away, fix what broke, and put a coat of paint on everything else. You won’t see a lot of lawyers getting rich or politicians grandstanding.”

And:

“It is hard sometimes to filter out the eagerness for sensation from CNN, the NYTimes or even BBC News.”

Remember what I said about people overseas indulging their emotions?

This person is talking about coverage outside of Japan.

“I found all local news coverage to be emotional rather than factual.”

And:

“I have learned more about Japan from your writing than from the sensationalist news sources to which I have access.”

Someone else knows why they call it infotainment:

“The news coverage here in the UK has been cringeworthy – as if they’re desperate for something bad to happen (like a nuclear meltdown and release of deadly radiation into the atmosphere, or another quake and tsunami) because it makes people watch their channel.”

My favorite:

“Most excellent! Thank you for the information. Maybe when we grow up we can be like Japan!”

I suspect we won’t be seeing any more articles for awhile about a defeated country slinking off the world stage, written by people who don’t know snot from day-old chewing gum when the subject is Japan.

Here it is, one more time, and now more than ever:

If what you know about Japan you learned from the overseas mass media, then everything you know about Japan is wrong.

*****
Back when I have the time. Thanks to AK for the link.
*****
UPDATE: Link from James A. with some more calm analysis.