In Germany, the largest newspaper Bild issued an apology for the coverage of the COVID pandemic, which was a poison that “made you feel like you were a mortal danger to society.”
In December, Neues Deutschland wrote a commissioned empirical study on journalistic reporting in the C_19 era that was shared as ‘One-sided, uncritical, close to the government?’. The authors describe the “very clear result of the present study” that the reporting was “at the same time close to and critical of the government”
Join The True Defender Telegram Chanel Here: https://t.me/TheTrueDefender
“She was close to the government because the media, like politicians, mainly advocated tough measures. At the same time, however, she was also critical of the government because the media often did not consider these measures harsh enough or came too late.”
On April 4, 2022, the German Ethics Council shared a 161-page draft report, ‘Vulnerability and Resilience in Crisis – Ethical, Criteria for decisions in a pandemic,’ criticizing the media’s lack of critical reporting.
“Obvious undesirable developments were hardly addressed with the necessary clarity by a journalism that saw itself as ‘constructive’ or ‘sensitive to the common good’ … Reporting by mass media that is too affirmative or one-sided pleadingly fails to stimulate the formation of opinions … CriticismCriticism is not only legitimate, it is necessary,” the draft report states.
The report is in the German language, but we got a translation that we can understand with Google translate.
Clarification and information must not be provided in a patronising manner, as it were “from above”, but there must also be room for discussion on an equal footing.
It should also be taken into account that many no longer obtain information from the traditional media such as press, radio and television, but from social media, in which on the one hand there is a lot of misinformation circulating, but on the other hand they also offer opportunities for dialogue and exchange.
German Ethics Council: Vulnerability and Resilience in Crisis – Ethical, Criteria for decisions in a pandemic (Draft, German), 4 April 2022, Summary and recommendations, communication and information, pg. 32
‘’ Within section 4 of the draft report is subsection 4.2, Reliable and robust institutions and processes of democracy and political participation (pg. 101-104). Below is a summary of highlights regarding “mass media,” noted in subsection 4.2.
Where the information has been extracted from elsewhere in the report, we have noted the page number in brackets for reference purposes.
These page numbers refer to the page number in the English version attached above.’’ The Expose reported.
Different opinions highlight different points of reference for the decisions of state organs.
All decision-making processes are based on civil society resources, free political culture, and enlightened political socialization.
In the pandemic era, many of the ordinary occasions and places where deliberative communication can occur couldn’t be accessed due to restrictions placed on society in response to the Covid pandemic.
Mass media communication allows the structured formation of opinions in a thoroughly diverse public. But, the critical part of the task isn’t forthcoming at the beginning of the C-19 crisis or to a desirable level. The reluctance to focus sharp CriticismCriticism on every detail in view of the size, the novelty of the pandemic problem may have been justified.
Mass media reporting is too affirmative and one-sided, and you cannot form an opinion.
An opinion article from Neues Deutschland agrees: “The crisis and state of emergency must not be used as an opportunity to forego critical journalism because that’s when he’s required! It must show the political and social conflicts that are under the ‘priority of fighting a pandemic’ but are in danger of being forgotten. Keeping the awareness of contradictions alive and offering them a forum would be an educational task in the midst of all the media hustle and bustle.”
It’s worrying from the point of view of democracy and is the impairment of civil society political engagement through the Covid contact restrictions.
The negotiation process on dealing with risks must be performed openly with the broad inclusion of socially relevant positions.
The critical review of crisis management is a must to reveal personal misconduct, systemic flaws, and dysfunctional forms.
Criticism is necessary for democracy.
The relevant voices must have their say, from the affected and from the experts of various disciplines.