3 ms·

Germany has a remarkable system of public broadcasting that is unequaled in the world. Following World War 2 it was obvious that the centralisation of media was

by quink 6y ago

Germany has a remarkable system of public broadcasting that is unequaled in the world. Following World War 2 it was obvious that the centralisation of media was one important factor in the rise of the Nazis and the western allies wanted to ensure that there was no way that the federal government could be anywhere near broadcasting again. Even just legislative control. The private broadcasters are regulated by the states. In fact, the Facebook pages and YouTube channels of the government in particular have come under a fair amount of criticism for having stepped over the line. This prohibition is anchored in the Basic Law through broadcasting not being specifically listed as a power given to the federal government and as such is under the control of the states. The federal government had planned to launch a television service to compete with that established by the regional public broadcasters. It was shut down by the constitutional court. Incidentally, Australia has almost identical but slightly more restrictive wording. The constitutionality of the ABC has never actually been tested directly in court. One dealt with that question peripherally and that aspect of the decision was met with derision in the Federal Law Review and the arguments, weak then, are completely idiotic these days. Back to Germany. The reason why it costs this much is because that is the price of a media organisation and system that is inherently federalised, distributed, with checks and balances all along the way, in a way where by its very nature it is meant to hold itself at least accountable enough and to stop the rise of fascism or other extreme ideology. It has done a remarkable job in that regard, AfD notwithstanding. If the media landscape would be led by Sky News like in Australia, pushing election conspiracies to the top of YouTube and extensively now cited by Trump himself or Fox News in the US or the BBC’s failure on Brexit we would not have seen a cordon sanitaire like we do because the hold the bastards accountable. The biggest media organisation from entirely different organisations, ARD, ZDF and Deutschlandfunk and they do so not in any way related to the Federal Republic of Germany but as sibling organisations that its constituent states decided to form. That is a beautiful concept. It was imposed on Germany, it is expensive, but it is an important part of keeping an ombudsman on democracy, public broadcasting that is an entirely seperate pillar to the very existence of the country itself. It is a price that we need to pay and we shouldn’t mock Germany for maintaining it or to consider it antiquated or complicated. We should look in the mirror and make some effort to have someone other than Rupert Murdoch stare back at us. There’s some saying attributed to him: When I call 10 Downing St they listen, when I call Brussels they couldn’t give a shit. The cost of public broadcasting in Germany is a drop in the bucket versus Brexit alone, just a recent escapade now led by one of The Sun’s former editors. German Public Broadcasting is only partially about entertainment. It is a publicly owned ombudsman acting in the public interest, while independent of most other power structures, and talking to the public every day. And there’s actually at least three, maybe a dozen ombudsmen depending on how you count. Wonderful.

codethief 6y ago
> it is expensive, but it is an important part of keeping an ombudsman on democracy, public broadcasting that is an entirely seperate pillar to the very existence of the country itself Exactly. I tend to think of those ~18€/month that I pay as a democracy fee – it's certainly expensive, but it's worth every penny err… cent. That's of course not to say that we shouldn't keep an eye on how that money is spent and shouldn't think twice about whether increasing their budget (again) is really necessary.
- hh3k0 6y ago
  > Exactly. I tend to think of those ~18€/month that I pay as a democracy fee – it's certainly expensive, but it's worth every penny err… cent. I never watch/listen to any German public broadcasting channel on television/radio and am still forced to pay nonetheless -- because I could theoretically use them. That's outrageous, to be frank. Honestly, having every household pay the fee while pretending it is not a tax is nothing but a vile gaslighting campaign. I make a habit of paying it 3 months late in order to create as much additional work and cost for them as possible, so far without any legal ramifications.
  - codethief 6y ago
    As I said, I think of those ~18€/month that I pay as a democracy fee. Meaning that no matter whether I peruse public media[0], I still see a significant benefit for our society as a whole and, by implication, for me. Both politicians and the average Joe end up making better decisions because of public media and these ultimately also benefit me. [0]: My own usage varies quite a bit – during the first lockdown it was several times a day; now I'm back to using them every other week. So I definitely see where you're coming from. Nevertheless I still arrive at a conclusion different from yours. > while pretending it is not a tax Legally, it is not. But in practice it certainly is, I agree. Would you be happier if it were also officially called a tax? For me it doesn't really make a difference.

by quink 6y ago

codethief 6y ago

> it is expensive, but it is an important part of keeping an ombudsman on democracy, public broadcasting that is an entirely seperate pillar to the very existence of the country itself Exactly. I tend to think of those ~18€/month that I pay as a democracy fee – it's certainly expensive, but it's worth every penny err… cent. That's of course not to say that we shouldn't keep an eye on how that money is spent and shouldn't think twice about whether increasing their budget (again) is really necessary.

hh3k0 6y ago
> Exactly. I tend to think of those ~18€/month that I pay as a democracy fee – it's certainly expensive, but it's worth every penny err… cent. I never watch/listen to any German public broadcasting channel on television/radio and am still forced to pay nonetheless -- because I could theoretically use them. That's outrageous, to be frank. Honestly, having every household pay the fee while pretending it is not a tax is nothing but a vile gaslighting campaign. I make a habit of paying it 3 months late in order to create as much additional work and cost for them as possible, so far without any legal ramifications.
- codethief 6y ago
  As I said, I think of those ~18€/month that I pay as a democracy fee. Meaning that no matter whether I peruse public media[0], I still see a significant benefit for our society as a whole and, by implication, for me. Both politicians and the average Joe end up making better decisions because of public media and these ultimately also benefit me. [0]: My own usage varies quite a bit – during the first lockdown it was several times a day; now I'm back to using them every other week. So I definitely see where you're coming from. Nevertheless I still arrive at a conclusion different from yours. > while pretending it is not a tax Legally, it is not. But in practice it certainly is, I agree. Would you be happier if it were also officially called a tax? For me it doesn't really make a difference.