Public broadcasters are subject to public criticism and scrutiny, and rightfully so. Their mission, and the fact that they are funded by contributions from the viewing public, require them to be far more transparent about and accountable for their public value than private-commercial media companies.
In this issue of Journalism Research/Journalistik, our debate piece as well as two other essays will address the topic of public broadcasting. Barbara Thomaß, communications scholar and second deputy chairwoman of the board of directors at German public broadcaster ZDF, wants to know the exact demands of those who are currently rehashing calls for a »reform« of public broadcasting. Other recent »reforms« in Germany, such as the overhaul of its railroad system, its armed forces, or its health care system, have ultimately failed to reduce costs and generate greater public welfare. Thomaß emphasizes the connection between democracy and media organizations and how public media contribute to democratic opinion building.
In this context, Germany’s broadcasting councils are an important authority. Since they represent society, they should be made up of »representatives of socially relevant groups« , which begs the question which groups and stakeholders actually are socially relevant today. Media scientist Sabine Schiffer worked with a group of students to see who represents the general public in the broadcasting councils of ARD and the ZDF Television Council. It turned out to be no easy undertaking, because these institutions are quite stingy with information on this topic on their websites. Generally, there could be more transparency and publicity; after all, the broadcasting councils’ own statutes stipulate that their meetings be public. This provision is hardly ever met at ARD broadcasting council meetings. Streaming or similar methods to make the meetings publicly accessible are barely ever used (with the exception of the BR, the Bavarian public broadcasting service).
In other arenas, on the other hand, public broadcasters are very eager to engage in PR activities, and – in the opinion of the leadership at SWR and BR – very successfully so. We are talking about the »beacon project« @ichbinsophiescholl, in which the two ARD stations used Instagram to »meet the target group where they are,« as they never tired of emphasizing. My Tübingen-based colleague Tanja Thomas and I examined the debate on remembrance culture, resistance, and fictionalizing history. The project in question started with the thought experiment: »Imagine it’s 1942 on Instagram.« As a result of our critical discourse analysis, we found an astonishing gap in the journalistic discussion of @ichbinsophiescholl: No one seemed to challenge the »collaboration« between publicly funded broadcasters with a Meta Group platform whose business model is based on data collection, personalized advertising, and unpaid »digital work«, that is, content production by its followers and social media editors.
Silas Ketels leveraged the sociology of knowledge to conduct a discourse analysis about business models, media financing, and ownership structures. The Kiel-based communication scientist examined a debate triggered by SPD-politician Kevin Kühnert in an interview with the weekly Die Zeit in May 2019. In the conversation, Kühnert, then still chairman of the SPD’s youth organization Jusos, caused a great media stir by dropping terms such as »collectivization,« »expropriation,« and phrases like »overcoming capitalism«. Ketels seeks to establish a connection between discourse positions and forms of ownership of the media that facilitate this discourse. He proves that, despite all the expected, almost impulsive reactions, differentiated observations were also possible.
Gabriele Hooffacker addresses journalism and the phenomenon of dissolving boundaries in her essay on »Content Creators«. Do they represent »a new phase of journalism«? Hooffacker uses the example of »video game journalism,« which was popular in print media in the 1990s and 2000s, but then faced competition from bloggers and influencers, today’s self-proclaimed »social media content creators«. She traces phases of development that may also apply to other journalistic topics and departments: A special interest topic mushrooms into something larger, it becomes popular, then social media and advertising permeate journalistic reporting, and new media forms emerge. However, the old problem of blurred lines between journalism and marketing remains, even if »social media content creators« believe that their primary function is to provide information.
Still today, we hope that the internet is a place where diversity of opinion and opportunities for participation can thrive. What we are currently observing, through, is more control, regulation, and even censorship. Wars and crises are further aggravating the situation, as Yulia Belinskaya poignantly shows with the example of Russia. Her article provides an overview of current state censorship measures, anchoring them in the long history of censorship in the Soviet Union and Tsarist Russia. The author draws on the political science concept of »securitization,« a specific form of framing that depicts certain developments as threatening. As a »solution,« it offers up state security measures, such as stricter laws, and language regulation. As a result of this sort of »security policy,« opposition media are suppressed and dissidents are labeled as agents and terrorists to then be persecuted and even murdered. Belinskaya asks: How much counter-publicity is still possible in today’s Russia?
This question is not only relevant for authoritarian systems, but also for democracies, which depend on diverging opinions and controversy. Weekly newspaper Die Zeit seems to see it that way, having dedicated a new section to »Dispute«. Well, dear readers, in our reviews you will find plenty divergent positions on current publications and quite controversial topics, whether it is about »Media as the Fourth Estate,« »Media Systems in Russia and in Germany,« or »Women War Reporters«. You can also devote yourself to the topics neglected by the media, which the Initiative Nachrichtenaufklärung has compiled. We can only reveal this much: There is a dark threat looming near the shore.
We wish you a stimulating read and we’re looking forward to your comments!
Martina Thiele
Translation: Kerstin Trimble