This Twitter thread is from a transcription of a 2018 TBS radio interview with several Jump editors. The poster has reliably translated several articles and interviews from Japanese in the past, and he sources the exact interview at the beginning of the thread.
Exact quote since it's split across multiple tweets, emphasis bolded:
"Oonishi says that there probably are women who want to work at Jump but in its 50 years of publication there has never been a female editor. The hosts suggest that it might be good to get a female perspective."
Oonshi, by the way, is the current deputy editor-in-chief, so he's not just some random editor making an inaccurate claim.
Would you say there's some merit to this discussion now?
Yeah, if even the chief editors are complaining that their department is a sausage fest there's definitely an issue. Specially since the way they talk about it seems to be a jump-specific thing, not something that applies to shonen magazines in general.
Here's an excerpt from the article on the Equal Employment law that you linked:
The law has been heavily criticized by many Japanese feminists for not containing penalties for employers that break the law, or providing stronger protections for women. The law also created the new practice of creating two tracks for women, the "management" track parallel to the men, and the "general employee" track specific to women, which allowed for more time off and location stability with almost no chances for advancement. The two track system was eventually implemented by almost half of Japan's largest corporations. The issue of employment also extended to the types of work women were hired to do. Most women were hired as temporary employees or part-time employees ineligible for advancement or trainings. Soon after the law's moderately successful implementation, the 1990s recession curbed the increases, and the percentage of women in the workforce dropped.
Editorial jobs at WSJ are high paying, stable jobs with opportunities for advancement (you can get promoted to Team Leader, and from there potentially Deputy Editor in Chief). It's exactly the kind of job that isn't covered by this law, and the kind of job that Shueisha is under no obligation to give women.
One obvious difference between editors and artists/writers? Editor is essentially a leadership role.
As an editor you're in charge of several series-in-progress, and whether or not a pitch gets nominated for serialization is up to you. That means that you're trusted to make judgement calls on a regular basis regarding which series are worth nominating, and which aren't. You're also in charge of giving the mangaka guidance and helping make their series better. Editors at WSJ are the decision makers, and the writers/artist just provide the content... content that has to be approved by the editors before going to print.
Just because WSJ trusts a woman to draw good pictures (which again, undergo quality control by an editor first), doesn't mean that they trust a woman with all the responsibilities of an editor. In fact, history seems to imply that they don't.
Let me put it in plain, simple analogy for you: You have an established brand with their line of products. A new competitor with barely a cent to their name appears, both have similar products and similar quality. Who's going to succeed? The former, of course. All because the customers believe in the bigger name. I don't believe a majority of the 2+ Millions who buy OP actually cares about the quality, they're only buying it because of the name. I won't claim this as definitive evidence, but there is an obvious downward trend for the series. Not a crash landing like SnS, but it's noticeable, at least.
It also boils down to simple economics: OP has such a large stranglehold on the shonen manga market, bordering on monopoly. If that market for OP goes poof, then the market will be ripe for picking for its competitors in the magazine. I won't say that KnY and MHA will become million sellers outright, since they still have other mangas to compete with (AoT and Kingdom come to mind), but I will say this: the manga market will be much more competitive than now.
The first 10 years of One Piece (1997-2007) you have Hunter x Hunter, Naruto, Bleach, Shaman King, Prince of Tennis, Death Note as million/close to million sellers. With a lots of series selling half a million which i won't name. One Piece at this point has 139 million in circulation/sold (from this source chart they released couple years ago).
2008 cut off: 2,390,196 by Gintama. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (5.9), Naruto (4.2), Bleach (3.1), Gintama (2.3)
2009 cut off: 2,614,269 by Saint Young Men. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (14.7), Naruto (6.8), Bleach (6.4), Gintama (4.7), Reborn (3.6)
2010 cut off: 3,246,355 by Nodame Cantabile. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (32.3), Naruto (7.4), Bleach (5.2), Gintama (3.9), Reborn (3.4), Nurahiyon no Mago (3.2)
2011 cut off: 4,056,981 by Gantz. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (37.9), Naruto (6.8), Toriko (4.6), Gintama (4.4), Bakuman (4.4), Bleach (4.1)
2012 cutoff: 3,211,191 by Bakuman. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (23.4), Kuroko (8), Naruto (6.4), Hunter x Hunter ( 3.4), Bakuman (3.2)
2013 cutoff: 3,602,603 by Terra Formars. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece ( 18), Kuroko (8.7), Naruto (5.5), AssClass (4.5), Hunter x Hunter ( 4.2)
2014 cutoff: 4,622,108 by AssClass. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (11.8), Kuroko (6.7), Naruto (5.5), AssClass (4.6)
2015 cutoff: 3,758,541 by TG:RE. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (14.1), AssClass (8.6), Haikyuu (6.5), Food Wars (4.3)
2016 cutoff: 3,477,128 by Food Wars. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (12.3), AssClass ( 6.8), Haikyuu (6.4), HeroAca (5.1), Food Wars (3.4)
2017 cutoff: 2,713,074 by Magi. Jump series in the top 10 were: One PIece (11.4), Hero (5.8), Haikyuu (5)
2018 cutoff: 3,267,843 by TG:Re. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (8.1), My Hero (6.7), Slam Dunk LuL (5.2), Haikyuu (5), The Promised Neverland (4.2)
From 2008 to 2010, One Piece, Naruto, Bleach dominated WSJ
2011 you got Toriko sneaked in the top 3 for Jump along with Naruto and One Piece
2012-2014: Kuroko took the #2 spot from Naruto for 3 years straight, still One Piece and Naruto in the top 3
2015-2016: two 3 years series AssClass and Haikyuu took the #2 and #3 spot
2017-2018: Hero and Haikyuu (with a detour of Slam Dunk) took the throne
The year One Piece sold for 32.3 million there were 6 Jump series in the top 10. The following year when One Piece sold for 37.9 million, the cutoff was 4 million and Jump has 6 series took the top 10 spots. One Piece as a brand didn't cannibalize anything.
If you want to take pre anime and magazine cannibalism There are like what 1.8 million circulation weekly? (maybe less now) . If even 1/20 readers don't buy your series (that's only 90,000 copies) after they read the first 10 chapters, then it is that series fault and not one piece fault.
This is probably the most important piece, there is a one piece age chart from 2011 where it distributes like this: 1~18 (12%), 19~29 (43%), 30~49 (32%), 50+ (13%). I don't think the 30~50 group (45%) would be the target demographic for the current WSJ line up
Also that analogy is whacked, just look at Yahoo vs Early Google, Sears vs Early Amazon, Microsoft vs Early Apple but let's not go there.
Have you considered the possibility that females may not want to work in an office of 30 sweaty dudes where they are all alone as the only girl, when there are many more workplaces to choose from at Shueisha?
And if you were to ask, "how did it become this way then if not inequality?" Well perhaps 50 years ago it was an all male staff due to prejudice. Or maybe it was chance. We will never know. But that does not reflect on the current situation one bit, as the above explanation is another viable explanation, and none of us know what is really going on.
I am not saying that this is the only reason why.
But given that none of us have access to Shueisha's hiring staffs' secret manifestos, none of your arguments about how WSJ isn't hiring female editors, amount to anything but groundless raging.
Let me put it in plain, simple analogy for you: You have an established brand with their line of products. A new competitor with barely a cent to their name appears, both have similar products and similar quality. Who's going to succeed? The former, of course. All because the customers believe in the bigger name. I don't believe a majority of the 2+ Millions who buy OP actually cares about the quality, they're only buying it because of the name. I won't claim this as definitive evidence, but there is an obvious downward trend for the series. Not a crash landing like SnS, but it's noticeable, at least.
It also boils down to simple economics: OP has such a large stranglehold on the shonen manga market, bordering on monopoly. If that market for OP goes poof, then the market will be ripe for picking for its competitors in the magazine. I won't say that KnY and MHA will become million sellers outright, since they still have other mangas to compete with (AoT and Kingdom come to mind), but I will say this: the manga market will be much more competitive than now.
You act like people are allowed to support only one series at a time. Plenty of million+ selling successful series debuted in the 20 years OP was running. People won't start to buy MHA/KNY volumes in droves if OP ended this year.
The first 10 years of One Piece (1997-2007) you have Hunter x Hunter, Naruto, Bleach, Shaman King, Prince of Tennis, Death Note as million/close to million sellers. With a lots of series selling half a million which i won't name. One Piece at this point has 139 million in circulation/sold (from this source chart they released couple years ago).
2008 cut off: 2,390,196 by Gintama. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (5.9), Naruto (4.2), Bleach (3.1), Gintama (2.3)
2009 cut off: 2,614,269 by Saint Young Men. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (14.7), Naruto (6.8), Bleach (6.4), Gintama (4.7), Reborn (3.6)
2010 cut off: 3,246,355 by Nodame Cantabile. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (32.3), Naruto (7.4), Bleach (5.2), Gintama (3.9), Reborn (3.4), Nurahiyon no Mago (3.2)
2011 cut off: 4,056,981 by Gantz. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (37.9), Naruto (6.8), Toriko (4.6), Gintama (4.4), Bakuman (4.4), Bleach (4.1)
2012 cutoff: 3,211,191 by Bakuman. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (23.4), Kuroko (8), Naruto (6.4), Hunter x Hunter ( 3.4), Bakuman (3.2)
2013 cutoff: 3,602,603 by Terra Formars. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece ( 18), Kuroko (8.7), Naruto (5.5), AssClass (4.5), Hunter x Hunter ( 4.2)
2014 cutoff: 4,622,108 by AssClass. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (11.8), Kuroko (6.7), Naruto (5.5), AssClass (4.6)
2015 cutoff: 3,758,541 by TG:RE. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (14.1), AssClass (8.6), Haikyuu (6.5), Food Wars (4.3)
2016 cutoff: 3,477,128 by Food Wars. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (12.3), AssClass ( 6.8), Haikyuu (6.4), HeroAca (5.1), Food Wars (3.4)
2017 cutoff: 2,713,074 by Magi. Jump series in the top 10 were: One PIece (11.4), Hero (5.8), Haikyuu (5)
2018 cutoff: 3,267,843 by TG:Re. Jump series in the top 10 were: One Piece (8.1), My Hero (6.7), Slam Dunk LuL (5.2), Haikyuu (5), The Promised Neverland (4.2)
From 2008 to 2010, One Piece, Naruto, Bleach dominated WSJ
2011 you got Toriko sneaked in the top 3 for Jump along with Naruto and One Piece
2012-2014: Kuroko took the #2 spot from Naruto for 3 years straight, still One Piece and Naruto in the top 3
2015-2016: two 3 years series AssClass and Haikyuu took the #2 and #3 spot
2017-2018: Hero and Haikyuu (with a detour of Slam Dunk) took the throne
The year One Piece sold for 32.3 million there were 6 Jump series in the top 10. The following year when One Piece sold for 37.9 million, the cutoff was 4 million and Jump has 6 series took the top 10 spots. One Piece as a brand didn't cannibalize anything.
If you want to take pre anime and magazine cannibalism There are like what 1.8 million circulation weekly? (maybe less now) . If even 1/20 readers don't buy your series (that's only 90,000 copies) after they read the first 10 chapters, then it is that series fault and not one piece fault.
This is probably the most important piece, there is a one piece age chart from 2011 where it distributes like this: 1~18 (12%), 19~29 (43%), 30~49 (32%), 50+ (13%). I don't think the 30~50 group (45%) would be the target demographic for the current WSJ line up
Also that analogy is whacked, just look at Yahoo vs Early Google, Sears vs Early Amazon, Microsoft vs Early Apple but let's not go there.
I'll confess that I did not follow sales until maybe 2012, so I was uninformed about the state of Jump series sales during that time period. But the bottom line is how OP has a monopoly on #1 at all times. During the Big 3 era, there was at least a semblance of a healthier competition, with all 3 constantly competing and the rest filling the rest with some good stuff in the middle.
Looking at 2009's sales pre-Strong World, Naruto & Bleach were actually closer to OP. I'll give a lot of credit to Strong World's marketing team for their promotion and jacking up the manga's sales, even though I felt the movie was average at best, although it was visually impressive. This is why I have a hard time believing the numbers justifying the quality. I see the manga's appeal and its chops, but not so much that it justifies the sales THAT much.
That said, this period seems to be moving back to a more balanced playing field with the manga moving back into pre-Strong World numbers.
Estimated Week 1 Shoseki sales for some of the Jump+ manga that charted this week (in bold). Kind of a rough week for non-newbies, especially for Heart Gear.
hachurui-chan, Hina Change, Kaibutsu Shoujo wa Hatsukoi, Moon Land and Kako no Anata all sold less than 1,900 copies.
I'm actually curious of sales number pre-2008... Most of the yearly charts I can see before that year do not have sales number and only show chart positions....
Have you considered the possibility that females may not want to work in an office of 30 sweaty dudes where they are all alone as the only girl, when there are many more workplaces to choose from at Shueisha?
And if you were to ask, "how did it become this way then if not inequality?" Well perhaps 50 years ago it was an all male staff due to prejudice. Or maybe it was chance. We will never know. But that does not reflect on the current situation one bit, as the above explanation is another viable explanation, and none of us know what is really going on.
I am not saying that this is the only reason why.
But given that none of us have access to Shueisha's hiring staffs' secret manifestos, none of your arguments about how WSJ isn't hiring female editors, amount to anything but groundless raging.
Oonishi says, in the same sentence that he confirms WSJ has never had a female editor, that it's likely that women want to work for the magazine. In the context of his sentence he means they want to work as editors (remember that this entire interview is about the editoral process at WSJ). If this is something he's relatively confident about after working at the magazine for over a decade, then chances are that women have applied for the role and not gotten it.
My speculation is based on a combination of Oonishi's statement, the incredibly statistically improbable fact that the magazine hasn't had a female editor in over 50 years, and a documented history of sexism in the Japanese workplace that still has not been fully resolved, according to this Wikipedia article on equal employment in Japan that you trusted enough to give a Like earlier.
You're right that I don't have a crystal ball that shows me the exact state of the office environment at WSJ, but I've provided enough evidence for my theory that I'd say it carries a little more weight than your theory that... *checks notes*... not a single woman has applied to be an editor for the magazine in the recent past because boys are sweaty.
Oonishi says, in the same sentence that he confirms WSJ has never had a female editor, that it's likely that women want to work for the magazine. In the context of his sentence he means they want to work as editors (remember that this entire interview is about the editoral process at WSJ). If this is something he's relatively confident about after working at the magazine for over a decade, then chances are that women have applied for the role and not gotten it.
My speculation is based on a combination of Oonishi's statement, the incredibly statistically improbable fact that the magazine hasn't had a female editor in over 50 years, and a documented history of sexism in the Japanese workplace that still has not been fully resolved, according to this Wikipedia article on equal employment in Japan that you trusted enough to give a Like earlier.
You're right that I don't have a crystal ball that shows me the exact state of the office environment at WSJ, but I've provided enough evidence for my theory that I'd say it carries a little more weight than your theory that... *checks notes*... not a single woman has applied to be an editor for the magazine in the recent past because boys are sweaty.
Good argument, but just as you asked me to name a female editor, I would have to ask you to name a female who has said they wanted to be an editor but had difficulties, etc. Or just wants to be an editor at all. They should be larger in number than those who actually succeeded, so you should have an easier job of it than me.... Unless the number is 0 for both.
That aside, good points and as a theory it stands, as long as you acknowledge that there is no evidence for it (which you have).
Still wonder why it took so long for the mod to ban him. Maybe S8 is what broke the straw.
All the discussion about gender representation in WSJ editorial department is pretty interesting, and kind of pointless as most of them are just theory of grasping at straws.
I think everyone is somewhat right here. I suspect there was discrimination against female in the past, but it's no longer the case now, based on that twit. The current chiefs in WSJ are open to female editors, but maybe they built up a bad reputation that female editors may don't want to join them.
It's all just my theory, as none of us has anything to back our arguments.
Good argument, but just as you asked me to name a female editor, I would have to ask you to name a female who has said they wanted to be an editor but had difficulties, etc. Or just wants to be an editor at all. They should be larger in number than those who actually succeeded, so you should have an easier job of it than me.... Unless the number is 0 for both.
That aside, good points and as a theory it stands, as long as you acknowledge that there is no evidence for it (which you have).
I mean the information about editors should be easier to find than the information of people who applied for the job (especially considering it's all in Japanese).
In itslef, it just seems that you don't want to discuss the issue and are looking for reasons to end it.
PS: Honestly, I'm not so interested in the topic, but I'm not going to follow your weird arguments like "sweaty guys".
Good argument, but just as you asked me to name a female editor, I would have to ask you to name a female who has said they wanted to be an editor but had difficulties, etc. Or just wants to be an editor at all. They should be larger in number than those who actually succeeded, so you should have an easier job of it than me.... Unless the number is 0 for both.
That aside, good points and as a theory it stands, as long as you acknowledge that there is no evidence for it (which you have).
I personally don't doubt those experiences exist, but I did learn one hard fact in all my research tonight: it is incredibly hard to find information about manga magazine editors that is available in English.
Hell, if IceEmperor didn't translate that interview, I wouldn't have found a single source that proves that WSJ has never had a female editor. The interview would still exist either way, which means the fact that WSJ has never had female editors was still publicly stated. I just would never have found that information, because nobody talking about it Japan typed the words "female editor" in English. With that in mind, I've got a good feeling that the experiences you're looking for are out there... you'd just have to search for them in Japanese.
I know that's not tangible evidence, but considering the language barrier, I'm not sure the lack of evidence in this very specific circumstance should lead to the conclusion that the evidence doesn't exist.
Also somewhat related, I recalled reading in the past there was no female mangaka in WSJ because they used to show author's faces on volume and on New Year's mangazine cover. So, WSJ didn't have a great history with gender representation, it seems.
That brings to mind a question, how many of the currently serialised mangaka do we actually know what they look like?
There are so many new series by newbie creators in the magazine and a lot of the long running series are by someone who doesn't show their face either that there can't be many we've actually seen publicly. There's like 3-4 that we don't even know if they're male or female.
That brings to mind a question, how many of the currently serialised mangaka do we actually know what they look like?
There are so many new series by newbie creators in the magazine and a lot of the long running series are by someone who doesn't show their face either that there can't be many we've actually seen publicly. There's like 3-4 that we don't even know if they're male or female.
I am actually curious now. How does that even happen? I get their news/tabloid culture isn't like overseas, but the fact we don't even know the gender of some??
Also somewhat related, I recalled reading in the past there was no female mangaka in WSJ because they used to show author's faces on volume and on New Year's mangazine cover. So, WSJ didn't have a great history with gender representation, it seems.
I am actually curious now. How does that even happen? I get their news/tabloid culture isn't like overseas, but the fact we don't even know the gender of some??
Manga fans can be creepy, parasocial, sorts who nose into the private lives of creators, so I think (especially in the internet age) that creators are just more private about this stuff.
There's been an update to our forum rules to broaden crediting/sourcing to all series news/announcement, etc. Please read HERE
To manage thread loading speeds and general user experience, we'd apppreciate if volume covers could be wrapped in spoiler threads, going forward. If you have any questions, reach out to a staff member. Thanks for your cooperation.
We use cookies
Essential cookies keep the site working. Analytics cookies help us improve.
en.wikipedia.org
