Applause for SPIEGEL ONLINE...

(By Ray D.)

No...we haven't been drinking too much Glühwein. Today SPIEGEL ONLINE ran a translated article from the Wall Street Journal with a conservative, American view of the transatlantic debate on torture and terrorism. EUREKA!

This is a very positive first step after the publication has run countless pieces from The New York Times and conducted countless interviews with left-wing Bush critics. Today's WSJ piece is a highly rare example of the German media attempting to provide readers a fair, balanced view of conservative-American thought in unfiltered form.

For Germans to understand American politics, they must at least have a chance to read opinions and ideas from both sides of the debate. Davids Medienkritik has never been about promoting the Bush administration or neo-conservative thought. It has been about promoting fair, balanced, unbiased media coverage of the United States and the American political system in the German media.

Present all sides fairly and objectively and let the reader decide: That is what good journalism is all about. SPIEGEL ONLINE's decision to run the WSJ piece is a first, small step towards that objective. Let's hope this is not the last time we ever see this. In the meantime we will continue to do our jobs...

Note: Here is the WSJ article in original English. (Registration required)

UPDATE: Hold your applause ladies and gentlemen. SPIEGEL ONLINE botched the translation after all.

Comments

[no_clever_name]

It's great that Spiegel Online actually translated and ran the article, but two points caught my attention when I read it:

1) The intro identifies "The Wall Street Journal" as "the conservative press" (presumably so that readers are forewarned what kind of people would write such things). Perhaps it is accurate to so describe the WSJ, but does SpOn routinely label "The New York Times" articles it quotes/runs as from the "liberal press" or "left-wing press"? Just wondering.

2) The part from the next-to-last paragraph about the riots in France "witness French paralysis in the wake of the recent riots" was omitted from the German translation of the article. Was there a (non-translation related) reason for this, e.g., perhaps SpOn does not regard the riots as actually being "terrorism" as the WSJ implies they were. Again, fair enough, if that is SpOn's opinion, but the article is supposed to reflect the WSJ's opinion. When translating a commentary (opinion column), one shouldn't modify it to fit one's views.

[RayD]

@ no clever name,

You're right. I can't believe SPON f***ed up another translation...

[RayD]

Great work no clever...see our latest posting. You get a hattip.

[Michael]

It has been about promoting fair, balanced, unbiased media coverage of the United States and the American political system in the German media.

A good cause indeed. I'm serious.

Davids Medienkritik has never been about promoting the Bush administration or neo-conservative thought.

Sorry, but that is exactly what the casual reader will take away. If your goal is to balance anti-american sentitments in Germany's media with a hardcore conservative American view, your doing a fine job. But, you're not changing anybody's mind (you got better in recent weeks, though). Then again, I doubt a large part of the blog's audience needs convincing.

[RayD]

@ Michael,

If you call daring to point out bias in the German media a "hardcore conservative American view", then I guess you are right. I'm sure a lot of people are uncomfortable with the fact that we are questioning the status quo. There are plenty of people who would just assume give the German media a pass on virtually everything. Not us.

By the way, David is a German and I am a dual German-American citizen. So calling us "American" is only 25% accurate. It might help if those who disagreed with us didn't immediately resort to knee-jerk pigeon-holing. It might help if you knew where we really come from.

[Michael]

Maybe you mentioned it somewhere on the page, but I think I always "knew" you guys where German. At least I kind of assumed that. I didn't call you as persons American, but your views (and that alone is not a bad thing, mind you).

I'm not sure what kind of impression other's get, though. Here's a suggestion: Instead of writing a sentence like "The German media sucks" write "Our media sucks". That way it's clear where you're coming from, and it sounds a lot less like bashing and more like actual self-critic.

Note from David: One of us is German and lives in Germany, the other is American (with a German passport and German roots) and lives in America. So - what's "our media"? "The German media sucks" sounds ok to me.
At the end, all I'm saying is: From time to time you seriously seem to lose focus and indeed _are_ promoting "the Bush administration or neo-conservative thought".

[neonichu]

@no_clever_name

They don't label "New York Times" articles and that has a reason: Labelling such an article as "left-wing press" would be seen as sarcastic, because it doesn't actually fit our definition of left-wing.