[Fake News] How the public broadcaster in Germany frames the public - Attitude Journalism 2019-05-08

In 2017 Elisabeth Wehling wrote framing manual on behalf of the public broadcaster ARD in Germany in four parts. This framing manual gives instructions on how the public service broadcasting can be shown in positive light. Framing comes from communication science and describes how statements can be embedded in a context to evoke certain associations. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

1. Teil 1 Unser Rundfunk ARD (Legitimation) [1,p.23]
2. Teil 2 Freiheit (Unabhängigkeit) [1,p.43]
3. Teil 3 Beteiligung (Beitragsakzeptanz) [1,p.51]
4. Teil 4 Zuverlässigkeit (Reform & Zukunft) [1,p.64]

[1,p.6] In February 2019 the framing manual of Elisabeth Wehling was leaked by Netzpolitik.org. However the manual does not intend to turn the staff of the public broadcaster into better journalists. The manual serves to better defend the fee for the public broadcaster and to sell the reporting more effectively. In addition the handbook confirms the allegations that there is an internally agreed newspeak and language rules with wich are argued rather than facts and objectivity. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

A non-explicit but recurrent aspect is the justification of certain positions with moral arguments. The word "attitude journalism" (Haltungsjournalismus) has become established in Germany for this approach.

But not only is moral narratives have the greatest cognitive traction in mobilizing approval or rejection of a thing. But they are also the most honest. [1,p.4]

The work of the ARD is supported by moral principles. The ARD is committed to certain things because it is convinced of their moral need for social interaction. A communication of these principles is not only maximally effective where it comes to getting fellow citizens on board and to inspire for the ARD. [1,p.4]

For this it is recommended how to deal with the arguments of the other side. However it does not define or clarify a task for the press or public broadcaster or logical fallacies.

We do not take it and we can not influence it. But it has central consequences for your communication: Never, never, ever use the frame of your opponents and use those frames that make your moral perspective on the facts clear over and over again - from interview to interview, from debate to debate, from document to document. Only through the constant repetition of new linguistic patterns over a longer period of time is it possible to cognitively enforce the new frames and thereby make them a realistic perceptual alternative. [1,p.17]

In addition to this comes a strange relationship to language. One can assume that Elisabeth Wehling knows how framing and its influence work. But she also defends what she calls honest language and is also referred to as political correctness. Thus Wehling proves her split relationship to framing in good and bad framing.

Strategic Framings is a gradual process. Never try to deny a discussion - be it "participation" or "freedom" - completely overnight within the new narratives and buzzwords and abruptly drop all the terminology you are currently using. This creates confusion and makes it unnecessarily vulnerable - especially in times when honest language is increasingly defamed as 'Political Correctness'. In addition it can make it difficult for the fellow citizen to understand their goals and messages if he suddenly finds none of the standard ARD formulations. [1,p.18]

Das hab’ ich in meinen fünf Jahren bei der BBC in London gelernt: Distanz halten, sich nicht gemein machen mit einer Sache, auch nicht mit einer guten, nicht in öffentliche Betroffenheit versinken, im Umgang mit Katastrophen cool bleiben, ohne kalt zu sein. Nur so schaffst du es, dass die Zuschauer dir vertrauen, dich zu einem Familienmitglied machen, dich jeden Abend einschalten und dir zuhören. [6]

That I learned during my five years at the BBC in London: Keeping a distance, not to ally with one thing, not even with a good one, not to sink into affliction in public, stay cool in dealing with disasters without being cold. That's the only way you can get viewers to trust you, to make you a family member, so they look at you at every night and listen to you.

In fact journalists can commit serious mistakes. People may knowingly or unknowingly select or interpret information in a way that confirms their own expectations. This behavior can also be seen in the fact that people are more likely to remember events that confirm their own expectations. Such behavior is called confirmation bias. Another such mistakes is the misinterpretion by omission. This is not a direct lie but the deliberate omission of informations that does not confirm your own expectations. Such behavior is also called lying by omission.

The journalists Anja Reschke and Georg Restle from public broadcaste also suggest this. Both criticize the neutrality requirement for journalists. Both have called for journalism to report oriented on values and demonstrate their attitude. Restle admits that journalists always include their own attitude when selecting and sorting out news. Instead of a balanced, critical and neutral reporting he argues that journalists should be humanistic. Reschke directly paints the oversized straw man. According to her democracy is endangered in Germany and the political situation is comparable to the Weimar Republic. The threat is allegedly from the right. However she does not provide any evidence for this. So both want to cancel the neutrality requirement in favor of a supposedly good cause. [7] [8,S.44-45] [9] [10]

However when journalists do not focus on the facts but on an attitude then this is reflected in the reporting. So the question is what kind of attitude journalists have. According to a study on the views and voting behavior of journalists in Germany a quarter of the journalists choose the vote for the Green-Party. And almost half of the journalists choose the left-wing and Green parties. The conservative CDU/CSU and the marcet-liberal FDP account for only 9 and 7.4 percent respectively. Left and Greens are thus over-represented while other parties are dramatically underrepresented. [11,S.18]

The Framing-Manual like the case of Claas Relotius sheds a glaring light on the methods and arrogance of some journalists. And if the journalists do not draw conclusions then readers have to do it. Criticism of the press is therefore not just serving the wrong people. Because of such affairs it is even more important to say what is. If the truth supposedly serves the wrong people then something is odd about the right people.

[1] Öffentlichkeit - Wir veröffentlichen das Framing-Gutachten der ARD 2019-02-17
https://netzpolitik.org/2019/wir-veroeffentlichen-das-framing-gutachten-der-ard/
https://cdn.netzpolitik.org/wp-upload/2019/02/framing_gutachten_ard.pdf
[2] Elisabeth Wehling zu Gast bei ORF Zeit Im Raum 2016-03-03
https://youtu.be/xc7gZ_c65HU
[3] Elisabeth Wehling: Politisches Framing - Wie Deutschland sich politische Wahrheiten einredet 2016-03-04
https://youtu.be/r8Radhef5eI
[4] re:publica 2017 – Elisabeth Wehling: Die Macht der Sprachbilder – Politisches Framing 2017-12-07
https://youtu.be/mrFtMGLPosc
[5] re:publica 2017 – Elisabeth Wehling: Die Macht der Sprachbilder – Politisches Framing ... 2017-05-11
https://youtu.be/3tuaXaXJ02g
[2] Cool bleiben, nicht kalt 1995-03-27
http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-9176410.html
[3] Georg Restle 2018-07-03
https://twitter.com/georgrestle/status/1014133298245853184/photo/1
[4] print Juli/August 2018
http://print.wdr.de/2018-07_08/
[5] Anja Reschke: "Dagegen halten - Mund aufmachen" NDR 2015-08-05
https://youtu.be/i9kv-rmvGKg
[6] Haltung zeigen! - mit Anja Reschke 2018-12-27
https://www.srf.ch/play/tv/srfglobal/video/haltung-zeigen-mit-anja-reschke?id=7d4dc80c-8f00-4df6-9d9e-1de8056b0508&startTime=198.067514&station=dd0fa1ba-4ff6-4e1a-ab74-d7e49057d96f
[7] POLITIKJOURNALISTINNEN UND -JOURNALISTEN 2010-05
https://www.dfjv.de/documents/10180/178294/DFJV_Studie_Politikjournalistinnen_und_Journalisten.pdf