7 ms·

One of the best things about learning German has been the access to German news media. I find Suedeutsch Zeitung and a few others hold themselves to a higher qu

One of the best things about learning German has been the access to German news media. I find Suedeutsch Zeitung and a few others hold themselves to a higher quality than almost any english newspaper I've read. It's good to see english media take note!

patall 9y ago
As a german, its nice to hear something like that since people here also complain about the quality of journalism going down. People are also complaining that public broadcasting (and having to pay for it) but I think that they are the one of the reasons we have good journalism as the set a standard which you will lose audience to if you report too much bias or show too much advertising.
- chiaro 9y ago
  I think no people anywhere at any time has been happy with their media.
- emsy 9y ago
  This is certainly true. One channel broadcasts the evening news (Abendschau) from 20 or so years ago and you can clearly see how diligently they try to adhere to journalistic objectivity (in choice of adjectives for example) whereas today it seems they don't even try it anymore.
- FRex 9y ago
  Having a public broadcaster means nothing. We (Poland) also have one but the quality of their websites and TV channels was always painfully average and since 2015 it's outright propaganda.
- futurix 9y ago
  Well, German public TV and radio isn’t nearly as good as the newspaper cited in the article. Compared with BBC - it’s certainly is not a great example of spending public funds.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - raphman 9y ago
    I'd like to object. True, the mainstream channels ARD and ZDF show a little bit too many quiz shows and music shows - and the main local radio stations are very lean on interesting content. But there is a bunch of public TV channels and radio stations that provide high-quality content - 3sat, arte (culture), ARD-alpha (science, education), Phoenix (politics, documentaries), Deutschlandfunk, Bayern 2, Bayern 5, and many more.
    - Semaphor 9y ago
      And yet most of the money I pay the GEZ, sorry, for the Rundfunkbeitrag, goes to exactly ARD/ZDF. I have neither TV nor Radio, but I'd happily pay what I do to the stations you mentioned. But between quiz shows, reality tv, football licenses and badly researched shows like Frontal 21 I hate paying.
      - fbender 9y ago
        These stations are all part of ARD (actually a "conglomerate" of Rundfunkanstalten der Länder) and ZDF (except Deutschlandfunk, which is a separate entity). So yeah, you already pay for these stations. If you'd watch / listen to them, they'd probably get more attention from the managers and thus the content will be pushed more into the mass channels. Actually, some of the stations are more like incubators for new concepts and shows that they hope to put into the main/mass channels (though others are special interest channels).
- Vik1ng 9y ago
  My issue is not with the 10-20% news and documentaries, but all the other stuff they do...
  - cJ0th 9y ago
    Exactly. And worst of all, all the good things they do are to be found on tv & radio channels the average person does hardly consume or at times when nobody watches tv. And this, I think, is highly problematic as it distorts the way Germans see their country dramatically. Many Germans, I believe, think they fulfill their 'democratic duty' by watching the 'Tagesschau' (the news at 8 pm) As far as politics is concerned, this shows offers almost zero journalistic value. It's only politicians selling their agenda to the audience (the same goes for prime time talk shows). The only good thing about it is that all parties get enough time to bring their point across and non-political groups are also allowed to have their say. The problem, however, is that it is not in the interest of any party/NGO to actually inform the viewers. They all only include facts when it suits their agenda. What the audience is left with is an incomplete picture of the situation. And based on this (and not well well-researched lists of the pros and cons to the solutions proposed) they cast their vote. Of course, the public broadcasters do also provide these missing information. But you have to listen to Deutschlandfunk radio, search out special documentaries on Arte which are broadcasted at irregular times or watch political discussions at Phoenix at times when you want to go to bed. The Tagesthemen (which is the late edition of the Tagesschau) is already much better. Some time ago they had a very good comment on mass surveilance that was totally on point. And the average, not Tagesthemen-watching person? They still think "meh .. I've got nothing to hide".
branchless 9y ago
UK "journalism" is simply stunningly bad now. When I think back 20 years ago the gap now is huge. I don't agree with the politics of The Telegraph but leaving that aside its slide is so sad. They now run stories about characters in TV programs as though they are actually real. All UK papers are now so bad I'd advise not reading any, including the FT which is simply terrible. They cannot die soon enough, the damage presently done by pandering to big bank advertisers is huge. I think if you re-incarnated and showed the editor of the Telegraph from 1950 the web-site, just the difference between the background colour of "sponsored" stories versus actual stories, he'd blow his brains out. Never mind the actual content. Do German papers do this, mix paid and actual content and attempt to show the paid as similar to real? Although this is nowhere near as bad as The Telegraph following the instructions of disgruntled banker advertisers: https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/peter-oborne/why-i-have-resigned-from-telegraph https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/peter-oborne/why-i-...
- chrisper 9y ago
  What about the BBC? Are they bad now as well?
  - petre 9y ago
    The BBC is pretty much okay with accurate reporting.
    - Certhas 9y ago
      Yes, but they let the newspapers set the agenda.
  - branchless 9y ago
    The BBC is a total shadow of its former self. Radio included. 9 o'clock news is like it's for kids.
- miles 9y ago
  > UK "journalism" is simply stunningly bad now. The Guardian[0] has done some great reporting in recent years[1]: Notable scoops include the 2011 News International phone hacking scandal, in particular the hacking of murdered English teenager Milly Dowler's phone. The investigation led to the closure of the UK's biggest selling Sunday newspaper, and one of the highest circulation newspapers in the world, the News of the World. The newspaper also released news of the secret collection of Verizon telephone records held by US President Barack Obama's administration in June 2013, and subsequently revealed the existence of the PRISM surveillance program after it was leaked to the paper by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. In 2016, it led the investigation into the Panama Papers, exposing the then British Prime Minister David Cameron's links to offshore bank accounts. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/ https://www.theguardian.com/ [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian
softwarelimits 9y ago
A good place to learn german and about german media & german humor: https://www.zdf.de/comedy/heute-show https://www.zdf.de/comedy/heute-show :)
readittwice 9y ago
Interesting to read that, after what role german media/newspapers played in 2015. Especially since even journalists of well-respected german newspapers admitted the lack of critical journalism during this time.
- Certhas 9y ago
  What are you talking about? You speak as if some terrible catastrophe happened in 2015 that has led to untold human suffering in which the media was complicit by turning a blind eye. Instead what happened was that Germany took in a several hundred thousand refugees and migrants, which was a logistical challenge that was met. The cultural and integration challenge was initially under discussed but hardly relevant to the immediate humanitarian issue. Crucially though, that under discussion was quickly self corrected. The big center left media organisations have clearly talked about these issues. And not years after the fact but pretty quickly. The idea that somehow collectively the left, the German media or some other institutions have turned a blind eye towards the challenges implied is a complete myth. For example, in the biggest left weekly newspaper, Die Zeit, pretty much immediately after the cologne harassment events in January 2016, the headline article on sexist Arab culture. http://www.zeit.de/2016/03/sexismus-fluechtlinge-islamismus-araber-frauen http://www.zeit.de/2016/03/sexismus-fluechtlinge-islamismus-...
  - readittwice 9y ago
    Your article is from 2016, while I was walking about 2015. This is pretty important since the events from sylvester 2015 were an important changing point. But please let's do not discuss single articles, it is more about the general sentiment the media wanted to convey. E.g. the infamous "Dunkeldeutschland". Since you mention the left Die Zeit: it's chief editor criticized the media for its news coverage during that time: http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/medien/bilanz-der-berichterstattung-zu-fluechtlingen-14416314.html http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/medien/bilanz-der-beri.... There have also been studies about the role of the media in 2015: http://www.zeit.de/2017/30/fluechtlinge-medien-berichterstattung-studie http://www.zeit.de/2017/30/fluechtlinge-medien-berichterstat.... Photographers complained about the selection of their pictures in 2015: http://derstandard.at/2000066973507/Politikerfotos-Propagandabilder-als-Inszenierung-entlarven http://derstandard.at/2000066973507/Politikerfotos-Propagand.... It's fine to disagree with me, but calling my critique a "complete myth" is quite unfair.

patall 9y ago

As a german, its nice to hear something like that since people here also complain about the quality of journalism going down. People are also complaining that public broadcasting (and having to pay for it) but I think that they are the one of the reasons we have good journalism as the set a standard which you will lose audience to if you report too much bias or show too much advertising.

chiaro 9y ago
I think no people anywhere at any time has been happy with their media.
emsy 9y ago
This is certainly true. One channel broadcasts the evening news (Abendschau) from 20 or so years ago and you can clearly see how diligently they try to adhere to journalistic objectivity (in choice of adjectives for example) whereas today it seems they don't even try it anymore.
FRex 9y ago
Having a public broadcaster means nothing. We (Poland) also have one but the quality of their websites and TV channels was always painfully average and since 2015 it's outright propaganda.
futurix 9y ago
Well, German public TV and radio isn’t nearly as good as the newspaper cited in the article. Compared with BBC - it’s certainly is not a great example of spending public funds.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- raphman 9y ago
  I'd like to object. True, the mainstream channels ARD and ZDF show a little bit too many quiz shows and music shows - and the main local radio stations are very lean on interesting content. But there is a bunch of public TV channels and radio stations that provide high-quality content - 3sat, arte (culture), ARD-alpha (science, education), Phoenix (politics, documentaries), Deutschlandfunk, Bayern 2, Bayern 5, and many more.
  - Semaphor 9y ago
    And yet most of the money I pay the GEZ, sorry, for the Rundfunkbeitrag, goes to exactly ARD/ZDF. I have neither TV nor Radio, but I'd happily pay what I do to the stations you mentioned. But between quiz shows, reality tv, football licenses and badly researched shows like Frontal 21 I hate paying.
    - fbender 9y ago
      These stations are all part of ARD (actually a "conglomerate" of Rundfunkanstalten der Länder) and ZDF (except Deutschlandfunk, which is a separate entity). So yeah, you already pay for these stations. If you'd watch / listen to them, they'd probably get more attention from the managers and thus the content will be pushed more into the mass channels. Actually, some of the stations are more like incubators for new concepts and shows that they hope to put into the main/mass channels (though others are special interest channels).
Vik1ng 9y ago
My issue is not with the 10-20% news and documentaries, but all the other stuff they do...
- cJ0th 9y ago
  Exactly. And worst of all, all the good things they do are to be found on tv & radio channels the average person does hardly consume or at times when nobody watches tv. And this, I think, is highly problematic as it distorts the way Germans see their country dramatically. Many Germans, I believe, think they fulfill their 'democratic duty' by watching the 'Tagesschau' (the news at 8 pm) As far as politics is concerned, this shows offers almost zero journalistic value. It's only politicians selling their agenda to the audience (the same goes for prime time talk shows). The only good thing about it is that all parties get enough time to bring their point across and non-political groups are also allowed to have their say. The problem, however, is that it is not in the interest of any party/NGO to actually inform the viewers. They all only include facts when it suits their agenda. What the audience is left with is an incomplete picture of the situation. And based on this (and not well well-researched lists of the pros and cons to the solutions proposed) they cast their vote. Of course, the public broadcasters do also provide these missing information. But you have to listen to Deutschlandfunk radio, search out special documentaries on Arte which are broadcasted at irregular times or watch political discussions at Phoenix at times when you want to go to bed. The Tagesthemen (which is the late edition of the Tagesschau) is already much better. Some time ago they had a very good comment on mass surveilance that was totally on point. And the average, not Tagesthemen-watching person? They still think "meh .. I've got nothing to hide".

branchless 9y ago

UK "journalism" is simply stunningly bad now. When I think back 20 years ago the gap now is huge. I don't agree with the politics of The Telegraph but leaving that aside its slide is so sad. They now run stories about characters in TV programs as though they are actually real. All UK papers are now so bad I'd advise not reading any, including the FT which is simply terrible. They cannot die soon enough, the damage presently done by pandering to big bank advertisers is huge. I think if you re-incarnated and showed the editor of the Telegraph from 1950 the web-site, just the difference between the background colour of "sponsored" stories versus actual stories, he'd blow his brains out. Never mind the actual content. Do German papers do this, mix paid and actual content and attempt to show the paid as similar to real? Although this is nowhere near as bad as The Telegraph following the instructions of disgruntled banker advertisers: https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/peter-oborne/why-i-have-resigned-from-telegraph https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/peter-oborne/why-i-...

chrisper 9y ago
What about the BBC? Are they bad now as well?
- petre 9y ago
  The BBC is pretty much okay with accurate reporting.
  - Certhas 9y ago
    Yes, but they let the newspapers set the agenda.
- branchless 9y ago
  The BBC is a total shadow of its former self. Radio included. 9 o'clock news is like it's for kids.
miles 9y ago
> UK "journalism" is simply stunningly bad now. The Guardian[0] has done some great reporting in recent years[1]: Notable scoops include the 2011 News International phone hacking scandal, in particular the hacking of murdered English teenager Milly Dowler's phone. The investigation led to the closure of the UK's biggest selling Sunday newspaper, and one of the highest circulation newspapers in the world, the News of the World. The newspaper also released news of the secret collection of Verizon telephone records held by US President Barack Obama's administration in June 2013, and subsequently revealed the existence of the PRISM surveillance program after it was leaked to the paper by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. In 2016, it led the investigation into the Panama Papers, exposing the then British Prime Minister David Cameron's links to offshore bank accounts. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/ https://www.theguardian.com/ [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian

softwarelimits 9y ago

A good place to learn german and about german media & german humor: https://www.zdf.de/comedy/heute-show https://www.zdf.de/comedy/heute-show :)

readittwice 9y ago

Interesting to read that, after what role german media/newspapers played in 2015. Especially since even journalists of well-respected german newspapers admitted the lack of critical journalism during this time.

Certhas 9y ago
What are you talking about? You speak as if some terrible catastrophe happened in 2015 that has led to untold human suffering in which the media was complicit by turning a blind eye. Instead what happened was that Germany took in a several hundred thousand refugees and migrants, which was a logistical challenge that was met. The cultural and integration challenge was initially under discussed but hardly relevant to the immediate humanitarian issue. Crucially though, that under discussion was quickly self corrected. The big center left media organisations have clearly talked about these issues. And not years after the fact but pretty quickly. The idea that somehow collectively the left, the German media or some other institutions have turned a blind eye towards the challenges implied is a complete myth. For example, in the biggest left weekly newspaper, Die Zeit, pretty much immediately after the cologne harassment events in January 2016, the headline article on sexist Arab culture. http://www.zeit.de/2016/03/sexismus-fluechtlinge-islamismus-araber-frauen http://www.zeit.de/2016/03/sexismus-fluechtlinge-islamismus-...
- readittwice 9y ago
  Your article is from 2016, while I was walking about 2015. This is pretty important since the events from sylvester 2015 were an important changing point. But please let's do not discuss single articles, it is more about the general sentiment the media wanted to convey. E.g. the infamous "Dunkeldeutschland". Since you mention the left Die Zeit: it's chief editor criticized the media for its news coverage during that time: http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/medien/bilanz-der-berichterstattung-zu-fluechtlingen-14416314.html http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/medien/bilanz-der-beri.... There have also been studies about the role of the media in 2015: http://www.zeit.de/2017/30/fluechtlinge-medien-berichterstattung-studie http://www.zeit.de/2017/30/fluechtlinge-medien-berichterstat.... Photographers complained about the selection of their pictures in 2015: http://derstandard.at/2000066973507/Politikerfotos-Propagandabilder-als-Inszenierung-entlarven http://derstandard.at/2000066973507/Politikerfotos-Propagand.... It's fine to disagree with me, but calling my critique a "complete myth" is quite unfair.