« Some Things Will Never Change... | Main | Lead? Germany? No, thanks... »

Comments

Der Spiegel, saying one thing in their own language, another thing in English, sounds so familiar. Is this a symptom of the "Arabicization" of Germany? The Arabs are expert in using this two-face strategy to placate their own without alienating the US too much. The down side is they become schizophrenic, and incoherent. The Saudis need our protection, the Eygtians need our money. The Germans need our protection and our money (military bases) and disintegrate into schizophrenia right in front of our eyes.

I hope Germans continue their anti-American escapades. It distracts them from correcting internal problems that would make them stronger. Scapegoat away, losers.

This is common practice among all major magazines with local editions. I know for a fact that Newsweek uses different headlines and teasers in its Asian editions when the article is about Asian issues. Some articles are even heavily edited for Asian consumption.

There is no law that sayeth: Thou shalt translate literally.

PS: The US money from military bases does not even reach 0,1% of the German GDP. What kind of "military protection" could those remaining 70000 US troops provide to Germany? (Soon to be halved in number and most are in Iraq anyway right now.) Against whom? Heavy tanks and fighter planes against terrorists attacks?

Man könnte den Spiegel Autoren auch einfach nur diplomatisches Gespür unterstellen.
Sie sind sich der durch ihre Berichte erzeugten Resonanz bewusst und handeln entsprechend - von einem Verprellen der internationalen Leserschaft hat schließlich auch niemand etwas.

@ Querdenker

"There is no law that sayeth: Thou shalt translate literally.

There is also no law that sayeth we can't point out the hypocrisy. In other words we aren't trying to forbid SPIEGEL from doing anything, but then no one should complain when we point out the obvious.

"PS: The US money from military bases does not even reach 0,1% of the German GDP. What kind of "military protection" could those remaining 70000 US troops provide to Germany? (Soon to be halved in number and most are in Iraq anyway right now.) Against whom? Heavy tanks and fighter planes against terrorists attacks?"

In one sense you are right, there is no more direct Soviet threat to Germany. In another sense, we need look no further than the earlier situation in Bosnia and Kosovo to understand why Germany and Europe at large still need the US military. If you want to call something a "fiasco," it would certainly be appropriate to label the initial European impotence in the face of Serb aggression just that. So until nations like Germany plunk down the hard cash it takes to support a substantial military, don't blame others for pointing out the obvious and continued German-European dependence on the protective umbrella of US power.

@ Querdenker

“The US money from military bases does not even reach 0,1% of the German GDP.”

You are almost right, the US. contribution was only .003%. The German GDP was 2130 Billion last year. Check out this article at http://www.geocities.com/fhs6366/Frankfurt_closes.html

“According to a 1990 newspaper report, the U.S. military that year pumped $8 billion into the German economy, including jobs for approximately 170,000 Germans, nationwide.”

If you think that 8 Billion and 170,000 good paying jobs are trivial, so be it. However, look at the effect that American soldiers and their dependents have had on Frankfurt:

“As a result of the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the subsequent demise of the Iron Curtain and the Cold War, this thriving Germany city and financial center (Frankfurt)is now bereft of all but little more than 100 of the 60,000 Americans that little more than a decade ago constituted almost one-tenth of Frankfurt's population.”

Frankfurt lost 10% of its population when U.S. Forces moved down the road to Heidelberg!

Then again, you have to look at the general demise of Germany and why SPON, Schroeder and Company and other German moonbats berate the United States. According to the Economist:

“Germany's economy remains easily the biggest in Europe, larger by a third than Britain's or France's. But the mighty American economy is now five times as big as the German one, against 3.7 times in 1990, and the gap is widening. For the past eight years, the German economy has been the slowest-growing in the whole of the European Union, so in comparison with its peers it has lost ground. Recently, Germany has suffered the indignity of being formally reprimanded by the EU for letting its deficit get too big."

Need I say more?


I don't know if Germany needs US protection at present - but Paris sure might

Pay particular attention to what is said and more important what is not said in this article -

Case in point

"Sarkozy says that violence in French suburbs is a daily fact of life."

Is that so - well I have been to several French ( Parisian ) suburbs and foundd them quite safe. Of course I have never been to any Muslim french suburbs but if the writer meant that why didn't he say so....I wonder why

"Since the start of the year, 9,000 police cars have been stoned and, each night, 20 to 40 cars are torched, Sarkozy said in an interview last week with the newspaper Le Monde"

And Europeans have the nerve to comment about the US reaction to Katrina and some isolated looting in the wake of a storm the size of Germany that completely flooded out a city the size ( pop 1.2M ) of Munich???

3 in rioting in suburb of Paris get jail terms
The Associated Press, Agence France-Presse
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 2005


CLICHY-SOUS-BOIS, France Three men were sentenced to prison on Monday after police officers clashed with youths in a Paris suburb for a fourth straight night and residents accused the police of throwing a tear-gas grenade at a mosque.

In all, 27 people have been arrested since the violence started Thursday night.

Two 25-year-old men and another aged 27, detained Friday during the worst of the rioting in the northeastern suburb of Clichy-sous-Bois, received eight-month sentences, including two months' firm imprisonment for throwing projectiles at police officers.

Five other adults were due to appear before a judge north of Paris, and three teenagers were to appear before a children's court judge.

In rioting Sunday night in Clichy-sous-Bois, 8 cars and 16 rubbish bins were set afire. Dozens of other vehicles were incinerated in the preceding rampages.

There were no reports of civilian casualties on Sunday, but six police officers were slightly wounded.

The suburb was calm during the day Monday.

The unrest was triggered when two teenagers, aged 15 and 17, died by electrocution Thursday after they scaled the wall of an electrical relay station and touched a transformer. A friend who was with them said the boys thought they were being chased by the police, but the authorities have denied that was the case.

The clashes have pitted youths - at times several hundred of them - against police officers, leaving a total of 23 officers wounded.

Clichy-sous-Bois has a substantial immigrant population, a large share of public housing and a history of social problems.

The landing of a police tear-gas grenade in the local mosque - close by which "100 to 150 youths were looking for a fight," according to a departmental security spokesman, Jean-Luc Sidot - threatened to worsen the running conflict. Muslims inside the building accused the police of firing the grenade.

Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy confirmed that the grenade was of the type used by riot squads, but he said "that does not mean that it was fired by a police officer.'

Sarkozy promised stepped-up security in restive neighborhoods with riot police to ensure order and intelligence agents to search for troublemakers.

Residents of troubled neighborhoods will get "the security they have a right to," he vowed Monday during a meeting with police officers and fire fighters.

Sarkozy says that violence in French suburbs is a daily fact of life.

Since the start of the year, 9,000 police cars have been stoned and, each night, 20 to 40 cars are torched, Sarkozy said in an interview last week with the newspaper Le Monde.

Hey Pogue Mahone, did you see the comment over on LGF about this report?
__________________________
Guys, it's far worse than that.

There are far more torched cars than said here. 2005 reached a new high, in september papers published the statistics for the 8 first months of the year and there was 20.000 (TWENTY THOUSAND) cars burned since January.

You also have to know how the statistics work. If a car is torched on a parking, and the fire communicates to 3 nearby cars that burn too, it will be counted as ONE burned car.

The MSM in France don't communicate much on that subject. You have to look hard for the information, which most people don't do.
The medias are systematically biased against the police force. They also always take side for the rioters as long as they are of immigrant origin.
One last thing, the same day that the 2 morons got fried trying to escape the police, A man was beaten to death in front of his wife and daughter, just near Clichy, in Epinay Sur Seine.
He was working for a streetlamp company and wanted to take pictures of some of the latest installations they made in Epinay. 3 or 4 Youths tried to steal his camera and beat him to death.
There was almost no media coverage of this, no "silent march", no visit from Sarkosy, NADA.

That's how things are in Frankistan my friends.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=18069#c0142
_______________________

Oh, I'm supposed to contribute on topic? Ok. I find the English headline benign. I would instead emphasize that the difference in translations PROVES that Spiegel panders to anti-Ami sentiment in Germany in order to sell magazines. In America, it would have the opposite effect, for the most part, so they modify the headline for the same reason - to sell magazines. Know your target market, I always say.

@PacRimJim
"I hope Germans continue their anti-American escapades. It distracts them from correcting internal problems that would make them stronger. Scapegoat away, losers."

This comes from the country which can not even handle a hurricane and where the government is involved in traiting their own cia-agents.......ridicoulos.....you are the bigger losers!

Querdenker said: "Heavy tanks and fighter planes against terrorists attacks?"

Damn straight. That's one lesson we learned the hard way. In spite of all the think-tanking and rhetoric, there is still a crucial need for the "Combat Arm of Decision" in today's world. Even against "insurgents." I guess you haven't been paying attention.

Querdenker also said: "What kind of "military protection" could those remaining 70000 US troops provide to Germany?"

Well, with a current ground force of roughly 185,100 German soldiers, 70,000 US soldiers increases the ground force by nearly 40%. I wouldn't say that's insignificant.

"with a current ground force of roughly 185,100 German soldiers, 70,000 US soldiers increases the ground force by nearly 40%"

I really dont think the 2 are comparable. Even half that number of US troops is probably more effective in actual combat than all the Germans troops put together, which, if I have to be honest, I do find quite reassuring some days.

@ frechdachs:

"This comes from the country which can not even handle a hurricane and where the government is involved in traiting their own cia-agents.......ridicoulos.....you are the bigger losers!"

First of all, keep in mind that Hurricane Katrina was larger than all of Germany. Then also keep in mind what happened when Europe went through a simple heat wave in 2003. Do I need to remind you that tens-of-thousands of mostly elderly people died while the supposedly caring, big-state bureaucracies were on vacation? I would be very careful about calling Americans losers in light of this horrific performance on the part of European governments just two years ago during a far less substantial natural disaster than Katrina.

As far as CIA agents go, there is no solid proof that anyone is guilty of intentionally exposing Valerie Plame. There are also serious questions as to how "undercover" an agent Ms. Plame was to begin with.

In other words, know what you are talking about before you comment on this site my friend.

It's nice to see that Germany (as well as most of Europe) and the U.S. are trying to keep up with the Middle East in their level of journalistic standards.

@ frechdachs:

Get your facts straight; Valerie Plame is not and never was a CIA agent -- she was a CIA operative, or officer. Now, if the CIA paid you for whatever (and undoubtedly) worthless information you might have, then that would make you a CIA agent. Besides, Plame was not "undercover" and was a known employee of the CIA before she was "exposed."

What was that about losers?

frechdachs (and anyone else interested)
Gateway Pundit has the absolute best roundup of the Joe Wilson/Valerie Plame history I've found.
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/
(scroll down to October 31). Also, the 9-11 Commission report is good - flat out calls Wilson a liar. The man would not hesitate to lie in public venues like the New York Times, but he wasn't stupid enough to perjure himself before a Congressional committee.

@Frechdachs,
Since this Hurricane which was larger than Germany and had stronger wind than all of the Germans could collectively muster after a day of eating "Kraut" . The US still managed to keep the deaths to roughly 1/5 th of the death toll caused by the heatwave in Europe.
How exactly would you, an apparent Master Race reject, have "Handled" Katrina?
By the way, did you see the latest growth numbers in the USA? It certainly seems that the gap is widening and the unemployment in Germany is increasing, especially among the uneducated like you. In the USA everyone can find a job, we are so desperate to hire, even a clod like you could find employment.
On the other hand, PLEASE stay in your socialist Utopia, it is after all what you deserve.

@Ray

There is one point with captions and headlines that you constantly overlook in your analysis: Limited space. I don´t need to tell you that German generally takes up more space than English.
Compare the original quote from the interview with the German translation:

Over time, we´ll get it right.
Mit der Zeit werden wir die Dinge richten.

In German, the full quote wouldn´t fit into one column any more, thus it makes sense to cut it down. In English, the original quote fits, so why not just take it.


As for the different intros: I guess they are a feature, not a bug. The English team at Spiegel is probably very proud about the fact that they write their own intros instead of simply translating the German intros (actually, I doubt that these are even available yet at that time).
I don´t see this as a violation of "journalistic integrity and honesty".


Btw, where did you get the information that Der Spiegel has a negative image in the English-speaking world?

"Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America notes a highly curious example of the AFP "doctoring" a Times of London report seemingly to fit the Middle East policy orientations of the French Foreign Ministry." http://www.trans-int.com/blog/archives/62-The-AFP-Can-Count-to-Four.html

Seems this selective reporting/distorting of the news infects every news entity. The distorting is always there, we are only able to prove its existence because of the internet. That's why govts, including the Euros are so anxious to control the Net.

Again, there is nothing "crooked" about the English version. The SPIEGEL is free to edit its article according to the audience as long as the facts (the interview) stay the same. Hypocrisy? Any good commercial multilanguage website will edit its local versions according to the target audience. Of course you are free to criticise this as hypocrisy but you should be aware that TIME or Newsweek do exactly the same thing. If BILD was going to write for a US audience you bet they would do some editing, too.

George M, it's rather pointless to quote a 1990 newspaper on US troops in Germany. Those troops are long gone. What's your point? My point about heavy tanks is that they are rather useless today when it comes to defend German territory. No invasion army will be coming to battle them. The Bundeswehr will see a transformation into a voluntary army for peacekeeping missions and anti-terrorism combat out of area.

I mentioned all this because the previous poster stated that "The Germans need our protection and our money (military bases) and disintegrate into schizophrenia right in front of our eyes." That's absurd.

I am very aware of Germany's current economic state. Taking in a country with a completely rotten economy m ay have something to do with it. Of course it's not the only reason and we have to wotk on it.

Querdenker,

I beg you: Using the word "fiasko" to describe the situation in Iraq (german version) and "ongoing instability" (english version) is not a matter of style or length or imprecision. It is a change of tone from careful optimism to the general SPON bile about Iraq. why not use "fiasco" in the english version, too ?

btw: can you give us any proof that any american magazine EVER changed their tone on the same subject-matter to attract international audiences.

it is a shande, that's all it is. but go ahead, keep denying the obvious. maybe you should continue to delude yourself with more SpOn reading instead of this blog. seems more fitting.

Yet in the German version, there is no laudatory mention of "building democracy" and instead Iraq is grimly referred to as a "fiasco".

Well, Iraq IS a fiasco for those getting caught in the Oil for Palaces scandal ;)

This is not a non-literal translation; it is a complete alteration of the text. I'm amazed that anyone could defend such a shoddy, unethical practice.

Someone said this shows the Spiegel is using anti-Americanism to sell magazines. I doubt it. I think the anti-Americanism and general negativity of the German version is real. It is the sunnier, more moderate tone of the English version that constitutes calculated pandering - to the supposedly dumb and naive American audience who are unable to take the hard truth.

Excuse me again but did the Spiegel ever claim that their English edition was a literal (or fairly literal) translation of the German text?

As for Newsweek: I remember one article I read in Japan (Asian edition) about Japanese war crimes and how Koizumi dealt with them. A few days later I read the same article in the European edition of Newsweek and the tone was definitely different, harsher.

A much harsher example would be this, of course:

http://ridingsun.blogspot.com/2005/05/newsweek-america-is-dead.html

"...and have come to the conclusion that the "English Site" is little more than a prop created to improve the publication's deservedly negative image in the English-speaking world."

Why TH would SPOn ever care about the image of its German edition in the English-speaking world?!?!?!?

@ Querdenker:

So your argument is that because other major magazines supposedly do the same thing, that being two-faced is just fine. Not only is that argument factually precarious, it is also a poor argument at its core. Just because other people jump off of a bridge doesn't mean I will follow them. Just because other publications might engage in shoddy journalism doesn't let SPIEGEL ONLINE off the hook when they do the same.

As Toby and kid charlemagne point out, this isn't just a question of loose translation or the independence of the "English Site" staff. If you want to deny the obvious and consistent difference in tone that follows an exceedingly clear pattern, that is your business. Just don't expect us to take you and the other apologist SPIEGEL ONLINE lock-steppers who defend the German media at virtually any cost (fuchur, Zyme) seriously.

I'm surprised no one has commented on this section regarding Iran. I think it is the most interesting part of the interview:

SPIEGEL: The US is trying to make the case in the United Nations Security Council.

Rumsfeld: I would not say that. I thought France, Germany and the UK were working on that problem.

SPIEGEL: What kind of sanctions are we talking about?

Rumsfeld: I'm not talking about sanctions. I thought you, and the U.K. and France were.

SPIEGEL: You aren't?

Rumsfeld: I'm not talking about sanctions. You've got the lead. Well, lead!

Two quick points :

1)
Re: "There is no law that sayeth: Thou shalt translate literally. “

Yes ,there is: it’s the ‘law of the quotation mark’ ! It signifies to the reader the exact reproduction of the original spoken/written words.

If the translation is not intended to be literal , then it ‘paraphrases’ , however quotation marks can not be used.

Usage of quotation marks in paraphrasing is at best a misuse , at worse an abuse of them , but in any case constitutes a compromise in journalistic integrity.

The opposite of integrity of course being 'manipulation'.

2)
Not exactly sterling English either : “ … in helping control Iran”.


You could set up a whole website about German MSM journalistic disintegrity - oops , I am on one :-) ... Heinz

RayD, I am really extremely surprised that people like you who write about the media all day long don't even seem to know that the introductions to pieces in newsmagazines like SpOn are technically not part of the articles themselves. They are written by different people (and in this case modified for the international version by still another editor) and have the only purpose to catch the attention of (and not put off) the respective audience. A title like "Der Tanz um die Lust" thus easily becomes "From Pornography to Withdrawal" (I don't know what those Spiegel people are trying to hide from us there?!?).

Seems like it doesn't matter how gross and egregious an example of German media hypocrisy you come up with. The usual water carriers for SPIEGEL and the rest will always try to rationalize it. Let's see, this time we have such outstanding arguments as:

- Everyone else does it (of course, without so much as a concrete example.)

- Golly, there just wasn't enough room (funny coincidence that the anti-American spin is always toned down as a result of this "room" problem, and never the other way around.)

- There's no law against it! (Of course, nothing qualifies as shameful hypocrisy as long as there's no law against it.)

A word of advice, guys. Stop blowing your own credibility by trying to defend the indefensible. Medienkritik caught SPON red-handed on this one. For once, why not show a little intellectual honesty and admit it? You never know, people might eventually start taking you seriously.

What a lame duck 'explanation' , by 'Konrad' for what essentially amounts to falsifying a text.
The meaning of 'fidelity in information reproduction' seems to be off limit to those data masseurs.

Now ,the opening article in this thread deals mainly with 2 points:
1) 'Funny' translation.
2) "the marked difference in the tone of the two headlines"

Check on both for biased slant .

But actually , we are looking at a quadruple whammy of slanderous distortion. There are #3 + #4 for your perusal , which have been overlooked so far :

3) Incompatible engl. headline versus the actual text :
"Over Time, We'll Get it Right in Iraq" -> headline
"Over time, we'll get it right."........-> actual text.
Not a sqeak about 'Iraq'.
(Another 'Tanz um die Wahrheit' Konrad baby?)

4)
The magazin's engl. headline implies an admission of failure like :
' well, we screwed upin Iraq` , but , hey, * over time we'll get it right in Iraq* .

Rumsfeld's subsequent message is thus shamelessly usurped.
Neither the meaning of his message in the entire interview , nor his many speeches dovetail with that implied 'admittance of failure'.
It's a journalistic disgrace of Teutonic proportion.


Rumsfelds mind is always racing a litte bit ahead of his words ,so , we got to keep that in mind , when we read transcripts of his spoken words.


Rumsfeld basically latches on to his previous mentioning of Truman's public approval rating by saying , and I paraphrase now : ' we don't govern by opinion polls'.

Rumsfeld continues in that paragraph :

"The center of gravity in the war in Iraq is not in Iraq. We are not going to lose battles; we're not going to lose skirmishes. " >
Rumsfeld is obviously by withdrawing the center of gravity from Iraq not referring to military operations .

Rumsfeld refers thus to the interviewing journalist about 'publicity battles' : We are not going to lose[publicity] battles; we're not going to lose [publicity] skirmishes!

And Rumsfeld elaborates on this very point:
Where are those publicity battles?

Rumsfeld: "Look, the places being fought are ,your country's [GER]..."

Who are the warriors?
The Germans...
Rumsfeld: ""....your country's public ...".[Germans]

...versus us Americans...

Rumsfeld: "...and our country's public ..."[Americans]

and you , the German media types ...

Rumsfeld: ""...and you (editor's note: the media) are the people ..."

... wield a certain influence over this outcome....

Rumsfeld: ""....are the people that are affecting that."

But over some time, we Americans will get this [publicity battle] right, when you'll understand our point of view :
Rumsfeld: "Over time, we'll get it right..

I rest my case ... Heinz


why not show a little intellectual honesty

Hi, hi, hi ! Intellectual honesty you're saying ? Good one, Helian. The SPIEGEL water carriers will show that when SPIEGEL will show that. When will that be ? Never ! Those people are patologically unable of rational and logical thought, just emotion based ideology. Maybe next life will be more merciful to them...

"There are also serious questions as to how "undercover" an agent Ms. Plame was to begin with"

Did you actually listen to or read Fitzgerald's comments? At the very beginning he stated: "Valerie Wilson's cover was blown". Are you accusing him of lying? Did you read the actual indictment?

Don't forget, it was the CIA that demanded the investigation of the Justice Dept. because a national secuirity asset was compromised. Are you saying the CIA was lying? Or they don't even know if one of their own is an undercover operative?

You must be in denial. And in the meantime, Libby is facing up to 30 years in prison. Why is that, if in your mind he committed no crime?

@ Vic:

I never denied that Ms. Plame's cover may have been blown. I simply acknowledge that there are serious questions as to how undercover she truly was.

"Why is that, if in your mind he committed no crime?"

Let's be very clear: Being accused of a crime is very different than being convicted of a crime in most democratic nations. So while you warn others not to jump to false conclusions 'Vic', you yourself are rushing to judge Mr. Libby before he has even been convicted of anything. Let's await the results of the investigation before we start spouting-off and labeling people "guilty as charged."

In defense of Der Spiegel, I loved the cover for "Die Bush Krieger". I lost my old "Ronbo" poster, a poster with Reagan's head put on Rambo's body, so I saved this one.
The best part about being insulted by EUropeans is that they don't understand what would insult us.
Being called a 'cowboy' ain't bad and I bet Condi Rice saved that pic of her as Barbarian/Warrior Princess.

Read today's Wall Street Journal OPED piece.

The real crime, (or as a minimum, gross negligence), may have been committed by the CIA.

Did they check out Joe Wilson's background and qualifications before they hired him?

Also, did Joe Wilson commit a crime when he devulged classified information , that he swore not to devulge, when he wrote his famous NY Times piece?

Hey Veeshir!

So so you think that Stern is going to come out with a "Special Edition" on the Paris riots like they came out with a special edition about Katrina and New Orleans?

@ David and Ray:

Going back to the original topic......are my eyes deceiving me, or does SPON have no coverage of the Paris riots in the German edition?.....but prominately displays an article in the English edition.

The English article is very pro rioter and anti-police.

http://www.stern.de/politik/ausland/index.html?id=548793&nv=redir

Has anybody checked out this article in Stern yet? The headline is "Rumsfeld ist gefährlich" (Rumsfeld is dangerous). Which, of course, you are supposed to believe this because the words, along with other not-so-nice comments about the administration, came from the mouth of Lawrence Wilkerson, an ex-White House official. But! There's a catch! He also states in the interview that the administration truly believed the pre-war intel! Doesn't this go against what Stern has been trying to tell its readers over the last few years--"Wie Amerika die Welt belog" (How America lied to the world).

http://www.dmko.info/stern103.JPG

This isn't going to help the "Bush lied and people died" croud. That's probably the reason this story is getting little coverage by the US msm.

@Toby -
can you give us any proof that any american magazine EVER changed their tone on the same subject-matter to attract international audiences.

I run across examples of Newsweek doing this on a somewhat regular basis, at least in headlines and covers. I don't have time (or, more honestly, inclination) to run down links to past examples, but I'll see if I can't remember to point out the next one I come across.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Our Mission

The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

May 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31