Media professionals are often also called “multipliers”
Foto: DPA/Kay Nietfeld
In the democratic model in which we are in ourselves, media attention is the first and most important currency. Nobody knows better than the AfD, which it understood from the start to create a maximum media interest. Her start-up capital was a few CDU backbänkler who were dissatisfied with Angela Merkel (“Berliner Kreis”) and the knowledge of the media business, such as the ex-newspaper editor Alexander Gauland or the long-time FAZ editor Konrad Adam.
All naselang are formed new political groups, and a reasonable first reaction to the conservative pile would have been: no reaction. The AfD, on the other hand, enjoyed a lot of attention before it was founded: in 2012 a proto-AfD called “Election Alternative 2013” started, and then it was already indicated that German media would have problems taking a clear attitude: the “world” opened up the CDU emissions with sympathetic dedication. The “mirror” also dedicated a large article to the new start -up, but with the basic superiority that does not have to make a lot of trouble: “Nagging from the right wing”, dripped it out of the noble feather, “frustrated conservative”, heading: “Merkel’s corner”. The “Spiegel” had taken over the inner wing directly from the Grands of the Bundestag CDU.
The AfD has been growing since these days. First she surfed on the euro topic and soon learned to set right-wing provocations, always in the knowledge: This is the cheapest conceivable advertising. No matter which sticks we hold, enough journalists will bounce over it, the outrage of the day on Facebook is certain: Those who break taboos get the headlines. Since the AfD was founded in 2013, it has been astonished to follow how a small party and its topics were jazzed up by all media until it had become a major party. Her success is so comprehensive that there are already curious feedback: Today an established size rubs like the ZDF comedian Jan Böhmermann on AfD-related YouTubers in order to stage himself as a fascism control. The YouTubers really become known, but hey, what the heck.
The unit is out of the bottle anyway, that can no longer be changed. The presence of the AfD has long since exceeded the threshold of ignorability. It is also clear that German mass media have a large part in this: it is too tempting for journalists to keep right -wing extremists up as excitement, the points are too easy. It is easier to scourge out inhumane sayings than to analyze the situation on the housing market or in nursing, or to explain why an unscrupulous robbery like the Cum-Ex system affects a society much harder than any migration movements.
It was recently known that the Protection of the Constitution has classified the AfD as “secured right -wing extremist”, and the media have a new debate topic: Do you now have to rethink dealing with this party? Can you still invite your representatives into talk shows? (Talk shows are considered in media circles for a central institution of democracy.) Talking rounds are called up, opinions are called up. The Hamburg journalist-professor Volker Lilienthal seems quite happy that Papa State has finally spoken a word of power and the danger of the AfD has confirmed that he wants to fail to access the Holy Talk Hallen: »The podiums in talk shows, these campaigners at the best time, have been a violation of the applicable programs since the latest classification by the latest classification Classifying. ”And the federal chairman of the German Journalist Association DJV, Mika Beuster, says:” It is no longer enough for journalists to report only objectively and critically. “Yes, but wouldn’t that be the core competence of journalists? Should you now dress in camouflage suits, swing fists and transparent? Wouldn’t an objective, critical reporting be more important than ever?
The channels of the broadcasters are unable to offer the AfD slogan? Then we should really talk about broadcasting fees.
It is striking often of “platform” and “stage”, which the AfD should not be offered. As understandable as the impulse is, what does he say about the media and their self -image? Why “stage”? Wouldn’t the people who are always popular shouldn’t be an “arena”, before which the politicians have to tremble? Shouldn’t you feel more like in the examination room, as in the floating tube? If talk show hosts understand themselves as impresarios, then they should not be surprised if they get a circus. If there is a 1000-page report on the right-wing extremist positioning of the AfD, then it must be possible to put it on TV and drive it into the corner? DJV boss Mika Beuster has little trust in his profession, about dealing with the AfD: “The old media logic, which is based on the fact that democratic parties in particular are in the opinion competition, no longer works here-especially in the format of the talk shows, in which not every statement can be classified.”
Yes, and that would really be a reason to get upset about broadcasting fees. The well-fed colossuses of public law are unable to train a few witty ghosts on AfD inspection, to know each of their volts, to have answers and sharp inquiries? Is it really that difficult if, in reports, the future of democracy is at stake? Or just nobody wants to do this unsavory task, while the colleagues go out to eat with the SPD …
Lilienthal and Beuster don’t remain unchallenged. The media lawyer Dieter Dörr finds that public service broadcasting is very good for democracy and human dignity, even if he invited representatives of a right-wing extremist party. “This happens, for example, by choosing the question and comment on a program.” Journalistic responsibility also includes dealing with anti -constitutional views.
In retrospect, the talk show veteran Anne, which has now come out, it can no longer understand how long you have maintained an AfD boycott in her ARD editorial team, but also warns: “I would always advise you to invite you on topics and not to yourself.” She would therefore not talk to you about the classification by the constitutional protection, but she would therefore not talk to you, but about pension policy, labor market policy or health policy. “That has always been the more real way to deal with the AfD.”
Industry connoisseurs Alexander Teske, author of the book »Inside Tauntau, sees it similarly. Between news and the opinion of the opinion «, which asks on Telepolis.de:” Where are the part of the party’s positions of teachers, abortion, minimum wages, speed limit or digitization? ” But in many editors there seems to be unwilling, even afraid that something can go wrong. “
Oh right? Should it be difficult to find people who stand for something who have courage and backbone and bite in the public service broadcasters? Should only wind pants and cream puffs be found in the editorial offices? That would actually be a problem, but you would not be surprised.