The Expanding Options Of Biased Journalism / Die erweiterten Optionen voreingenommenen Journalismus'

(Deutsche Version am Ende des Beitrags)

Many journalists in Germany consider George W. Bush - in accordance with the writings of their hero Michael Moore - a dangerous idiot, who only thinks in black and white.

How to convey that message to the audience?

Some journalists might simply say:

"George W. Bush is a dangerous idiot, who only thinks in black and white."

In a way that suffices, but it's only an opinion of a journalist, and that carries little weight for many folks.

It is somewhat more satisfying to create the impression of an avalanche or at least the beginning of an avalanche:

"More and more people call George W. Bush a dangerous idiot, who only thinks in black and white."

That's ok for a plain vanilla biased article. It is, incidentally, the wording of choice for German left-wing media such as SPIEGEL ONLINE or Stern. Still, if the avalanche concept is used too often in reporting - and it is used excessively in the German media - it's becoming stale, boring, unconvincing.

So for a stronger effect German journalists look for quotes from real people, for instance experts. Like this one:

(Fill in name) calls George W. Bush a dangerous idiot, who only thinks in black and white."

"Experts" who would testify against Bush any time, whether day or night, are in rich supply, and therefore they come cheap. So, indeed, that is a solution chosen frequently, in particular in the electronic media.

Of highest value for the German media are experts with close ties to the Bush administration who are willing to testify against Bush. It doesn't matter if they still have close ties - it is sufficient they have had a working relationship. In this case the reporting would look like this:

"Even (Fill in name), former (please choose one: CIA agent / FBI agent / member of a Pentagon think tank / etc.), calls George W. Bush a dangerous idiot, who only thinks in black and white."

That's great. A former Bush employee supports your prejudices - nothing better could happen to you! This lifts up your article from the stinking pits of biased reporting to the high-brow level of neutrality.

Still, some journalists want to go that extra mile. They want that special something.

Enter Thomas Klau from Financial Times Germany. His sophisticated concept runs like this:

"Even I call George W. Bush a dangerous idiot, who only thinks in black and white."

This is sensational. Klau has reached the ultimate climax of biased reporting: a journalist who quotes himself as a witness of the dumbness of George W. Bush. In his comment:

A Transatlanticist Repents

Thomas Klau reports on his own dramatic loss of support for George W. Bush:

"...I have had to revise a fundamental conviction of mine which was fixed for decades. Up to a year ago, I would have held it for impossible that an American government could fail in such a stupid and spectacular way during such an important test such as the occupation of Iraq as the current administration and their representatives Jay Garner and L. Paul Bremer III. ...

My own change can be seen as symptomatic for a process that will leave deep impressions on Transatlantic relations and in political life in the coming decades."

Bravo, Thomas Klau! I guess you're the first journalist who uses himself as a witness against Bush. A completely new approach. It's brilliant! I mean, just consider how inexpensive investigative journalism will be in the future: rather than spending valuable time chasing "experts" who conform with your opinion, all you have to do is to interview yourself and comment on your answers. Why didn't anybody invent this sort of introspective journalism before?

(Translation by Ray D.)

Deutsche Übersetzung

Die erweiterten Optionen voreingenommenen Journalismus'

Viele Journalisten in Deutschland halten George W. Bush - in Übereinstimmung mit den Publikationen ihres Helden Michael Moore - für einen gefährlichen Idioten, der nur in schwarz und weiß denkt.

Wie kann man diese Botschaft dem Publikum übermitteln?

Einige Journalisten könnten einfach sagen:

"George W. Bush ist ein gefährlicher Idiot, der nur in schwarz und weiß denkt."

In gewisser Weise reicht das, aber es ist nur die Meinung eines Journalisten, und die besitzt für viele Leute nicht viel Gewicht.

Es ist schon etwas besser, den Eindruck einer Lawine oder zumindestens des Beginns einer Lawine herzustellen:

"Immer mehr Leute nennen George W. Bush einen gefährlichen Idioten, der nur in schwarz und weiß denkt."

Das ist in Ordnung für einen voreingenommenen Artikel nach dem 08/15-Muster. Nebenbei gesagt ist dies die Formulierung der Wahl für linke deutsche Medien wie SPIEGEL ONLINE oder Stern. Trotzdem - wenn das Lawinen-Konzept zu oft in der Berichterstattung verwendet wird (und es wird übertrieben oft in den deutschen Medien eingesetzt), dann wirkt das abgestanden, langweilig, nicht überzeugend.

Deshalb suchen deutsche Journalisten auf der Suche nach stärkeren Effekten nach Zitaten tatsächlicher Zeitgenossen. z.B. nach Experten. Wie dieses:

(Namen einfügen) nennt George W. Bush einen gefährlichen Idioten, der nur in schwarz und weiß denkt."

Es gibt jede Menge "Experten", die gegen Bush aussagen wollen, zu jeder Tages- und Nachtzeit, und sie sind deshalb preisgünstig zu bekommen. Das ist tatsächlich eine Lösung, die oft gewählt wird, besonders in den elektronischen Medien.

Von höchstem Wert für die deutschen Medien sind Experten mit engen Bindungen an die Bush-Administration, die bereit sind gegen Bush Stellung zu nehmen. Dabei ist es egal, ob sie immer noch enge Bindungen haben - es reicht, daß sie einmal eine enge Beziehung gehabt hatten. In solchen Fällen schaut die Berichterstattung so aus:

"Sogar (Name einfügen), der frühere (bitte auswählen: CIA Agent / FBI Agent / Mitglied eines Think Tanks des Pentagons) nennt George W. Bush einen gefährlichen Idioten, der nur in schwarz und weiß denkt."

Das ist großartig. Wenn Bush-Mitarbeiter Deine Vorurteile bestätigen - was könnte einem besseres passieren? Damit wird Dein Artikel aus dem stinkenden Abfall voreingenommener Berichterstattung auf die vornehme Höhe der Neutralität erhoben.

Obwohl - es gibt dann immer noch Journalisten, die sich zusätzlich anstrengen. Die eben etwas ganz besonderes wollen.

Auftritt Thomas Klau von der Financial Times Deutschland. Sein intelligentes Konzept sieht so aus:

"Sogar ich nenne George W. Bush einen gefährlichen Idioten, der nur in schwarz und weiß denkt."

Das ist sensationell. Klau hat damit den ultimativen Gipfel voreingenommener Berichterstattung erreicht: ein Journalist, der sich selbst als Zeuge für die Dummheit von George W. Bush zitiert. In seinem Kommentar:

Abbitte eines Transatlantikers

berichtet Thomas Klau über den dramatischen Verlust seiner Unterstützung für George W. Bush:

"...eine Grundüberzeugung, in Jahrzehnten gefestigt, habe ich revidiert. Bis vor gut einem Jahr hätte ich es für unmöglich gehalten, dass eine amerikanische Regierung bei einer so entscheidenden Bewährungsprobe wie der Besatzung Iraks auf so spektakulär stupide Art und Weise versagt wie die jetzige Administration und ihre Statthalter Jay Garner und L. Paul Bremer III. ...

Mein eigener Wandel dürfte symptomatisch sein für einen Prozess, der in den transatlantischen Beziehungen und im politischen Leben der nächsten Jahrzehnten tiefe Spuren hinterlassen wird.

Bravo Thomas Klau! Ich vermute, Sie sind der erste Journalist, der sich selbst als Zeuge gegen Bush einsetzt. Ein vollkommen neuer Ansatz. Wirklich brilliant! Man muß sich doch nur einmal vor Augen halten, wie preisgünstig in der Zukunft investigativer Journalismus kommt: statt wertvolle Zeit damit zu vertun, "Experten" zu finden, die mit der eigenen Meinung übereinstimmen, muß man nichts anderes tun, als sich selbst zu interviewen und die eigenen Antworten zu kommentieren. Warum ist bisher noch niemand auf diese Form introspektiven Journalismus gekommen?

Comments

[Joe]

wow. The press is both simplistic and totally lacking in any sort of editorial rigeur!

[Klink]

Article wrote:
Many journalists in Germany consider George W. Bush - in accordance with the writings of their hero Michael Moore

German Journalists consider Michael Moore as their hero? The media-commentaries on MM often turned harshly against him during his last Germany-visit at the end of 2003. As the above article linked to Financial Times Germany, here is a bashing by Financial Times on Michael Moore, titld Stupid White Man. Not exactly a hero's portrayal.

I also found the above critizised column relatively dull. (too many "Ich"). Interestingly, the same author wrote a full year befor the Iraq-war a column "Yes to a war against Saddam", in March 2002(!), on the grounds of morality, not WMDs.

Indeed quite a turn by this author - if only David's blog had been around then and we could compare commentaries to this columnist! ;-)

[Thomas]

When ARD's "Morgenmagazin" airs a VERY positive report about Moore, after which host Gerd Scobel asks his colleague Judith Schulte-Loh what she thinks about Moore and she begins to smile all over her face and says "Oh, he's so great! I love his books!" - that's not what I would call turning harshly on MM... (This was some time at the beginning of this year.)

[Sandy]

Who is this idiotarian and why should I care?

[Gabi]

There are similar problems in the US:

Woodward at War
A "Plan of Attack" against George W. Bush?

BY RUSH LIMBAUGH
Wednesday, April 21, 2004 12:01 a.m. EDT

Bob Woodward is back with yet another book, "Plan of Attack." That title made me first think the work was a manual on unseating George W. Bush. Discussing his book on CBS's "60 Minutes," Mr. Woodward said, in essence, that Dick Cheney ran the Iraq war and talked President Bush into it, though President Bush was never crazy about it; the CIA botched everything again; the one man in the administration we can trust, Colin Powell, was kept out of the loop; God talks to President Bush and President Bush listens; and President Bush is an idiot who disdains the truly smart people of the world...

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110004981

[Gabi]

Sorry, it is a new and different theme. I just read this and find it so remarkable. I want to share this about an Italian brave hero. I wish the soldiers would have rescued him and I wish the other three Italian men will come home soon:

'How an Italian Died'
Writing in National Review Online, Michael Ledeen has an interesting theory about why Al-Jazeera did not air the tape of terrorists in Iraq murdering an Italian hostage:

The terrorists present the world with an endless supply of lies, which generally take the form of accusing us of what they do (and we don't). Many of their actions are staged precisely for the benefit of reporters (like the horror scene of the four dead American contractors a couple of weeks ago). They brought in the television cameras the other day to film the execution of an Italian hostage, Fabrizio Quattrocchi, but something went wrong. After forcing him to dig his own grave, they put a hood over his head and ordered him to kneel so he could be killed. He wouldn't go for it. He tried to remove the hood, and defiantly yelled at them "I will show you how an Italian dies." The scene was a propaganda disaster for them, and good old al Jazeera, the modern mother of lies, announced that they had the tape but wouldn't release it because it was too terrible to witness. It was terrible, but not in the way al Jazeera wanted us to think. It showed Western bravery, not Arab domination, so they couldn't show it.

[Klink]

Thomas
When ARD's "Morgenmagazin" airs a VERY positive report about Moore, after which host Gerd Scobel asks his colleague Judith Schulte-Loh what she thinks about Moore and she begins to smile all over her face and says "Oh, he's so great! I love his books!" - that's not what I would call turning harshly on MM... (This was some time at the beginning of this year.)

Well, I am sure there can be anecdotal evidence found for both sides - I read dozens of negative articles on Michael Moore and think he's been fairly well de-mystified by German press.

One of those articles described a chilling episode: MM did his usual funny standup-routine in front of the usual very young German crowd (highschool to college-age mostly). Everybody laughed at the usual MM-jokes about Americans not being able to find Iraq on the map, and many other jokes about WMDs and all that. It turned into the usual funny satire-show.

Then he mentioned "and just yesterday, 4 more US-soldiers died in Iraq". And the people began to applaud as well, being in the standup-rhythm. At that point - the journalist described - even MM became uncomfortable and tried to silence the crowd.

I think it was one of those moments, when even MM himself realized, he is walking a thin line of being a sorcerer's apprentice when combining certain issues with humour and cliches in foreign countries. What I said before about MM: I think he's a great satirical filmmaker, very bad hasty-written books, and definitely better for a US-audience than for abroad. And one of the reasons why I believe the latter is above described (paraphrased) anecdote.

@Gabi
I agree it was a brave story about this Italian - but the theory of "propaganda disaster" by National Review is a wrong one: They had four hostages. If they cared about a "good video" (cough), they had just killed the next hostage, this time with hands tied behind the back. It's not as if one or two dead would matter to them. You can not apply our thinking to these people.

[ch.speicher]

klink wrote

"You can not apply our thinking to these people."

WRONG!

hitler was an EVIL man , saddam is an EVIL dead man,

pol pot (studied in france) was EVIL, no marsian,

castro (a son of two spanians) is EVIL not "different",

kim is EVIL, the islamofascists (many of them well educated middle class kids) are EVIL not "holy",

we SURE can/could apply our thinking on them

ie they are EVIL bastards and behave exactly like that.

[ch.speicher]

which means its a very GOOD thing to KILL/punish them if they causing trouble and to RESIST their evil whenever it shows its ugly face.

this brave italian and the USMC and all that are FIGHTING for our freedom are making a HUGE difference to our future, and its the LEAST thing that we can do to honour their memory!

amen :|

[Deist]

I must say i start to get disapointed lately by this site.
There is enough real bias (against and pro Bush / America / whatever) that you should spend your time with instead of picking on such small things as this one.

Alone such a statement: "This is sensational. Klau has reached the ultimate climax of biased reporting: a journalist who quotes himself as a witness of the dumbness of George W. Bush. In his comment:"

You know if i were you i wouldnt build a whole post in your blog about JOURNALISM and REPORTING which finds its end in a COMMENT !

Actually a comment has nothing to do with anglo saxxon traditions of journalism and news. Its exactly what the name says: a comment.
And comments are always "biased".

As for michael moore. Well i read one of his books and i saw one of his films. I liked them because they are FUNNY. I didnt ever think anybody would take that SERIOUS until he got an oscar for best documentary .... in the usa.

[SleepyInSeattle]

I don't know who this Klau guy is, but after reading a couple of his columns, he comes across as a typical self-righteous leftist know-it-all. His bias is about as well hidden as Chomsky's. But it looks like an OP-ED to me so it doesn't really matter, that can't possibly be considered a news article or a report from a journalist.

"There is enough real bias (against and pro Bush / America / whatever) that you should spend your time with instead of picking on such small things as this one."

You can always suggest articles they can cover I'm sure.

"You know if i were you i wouldnt build a whole post in your blog about JOURNALISM and REPORTING which finds its end in a COMMENT !"

Err, look at this site's description. Obviously there will be comments, that's how it's always been.

For some reason this American soldier in Iraq doesn't find Moore all that funny. I mean why should he take the hilariously funny Moore so seriously?

[George M]

@Sleepy

Contrast Moore to Pat Tillman. You wonder what Moore does with his euro earnings. I know he does not spend it on his wardrobe!

In case our German friends havn't read about Pat Tillman, he was an NFL football player who played for the Arizona Cardinals. He quit his 3 million a year job with the Cardinals after 9/11 and joined the Army Rangers with his brother: a $2,980,000 per year pay cut. He was killed in action in Afghanistan yesterday.

[Gabi]

Die Deutschen teilen Metin Kaplans Auffassung: Die wahren Terroristen sind die USA (Allerdings war es damals Clinton).

Anti-Amerikanismus
Vor sechs Jahren übernahm Metin Kaplan von seinem verstorbenen Vater die Führung des "Kalifatsstaates". Seine Gesinnung wurde spätestens 1998 offenbar, als die Vereinigten Staaten die Terrorangriffe auf zwei US-Botschaften mit Vergeltungsschlägen auf Ziele im Sudan und Afghanistan beantworten. Der Kalif wandte sich per Fax an die Presse und schrieb: "Wir tadeln diesen verabscheuungswürdigen Angriff und verfluchen den Präsidenten des aggressiven und großen Satans USA." Es sei für alle Muslime Pflicht, so Kaplan, der Mobilisierung zum allgemeinen Glaubenskampf ausnahmslos zu folgen: "Wer gegen den Islam Partei ergreift und sich auf die Seite der USA stellt, wird zu unserem bittersten Feind. Die USA haben nun noch einmal erwiesen, dass sie die wahren Terroristen sind."

http://online.wdr.de/online/news2/kaplan/index.phtml

[Mathesar]

Wir lassen weltweit mehr als einen "Schurken" weiterhin morden. Was ist denn z. B. mit Gadaffi, der jetzt gerade wieder zum großen Freund der USA mutiert??

Die "Befreiung" durch die USA hat bisher zwischen 8000-10000 zivile Opfer gefordert. Alternativ durch die Einwirkung der Befreier selbst oder durch das Chaos, das durch die Befreiung hervorrgerufen wurde und voraussichtlich weiter zunehmen wird.

Daß das alles mit hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit vorherzusagen war, ist keine neue Erkenntniss. Das die Strategen des weißen Hauses ihre Fehler nicht zugeben wollen, ist auch nicht neues. Bei Mr. "fehlerlos" Bush.....(wie peinlich...nach seinen Fehlern gefragt zu werden und diese nicht zu kennen), wird es voraussichtlich noch etwas länger (nämlich bis zur nächsten - verlorenen - Wahl) dauern.

[Mathesar]

Ist das auch "biased":

Botschafter gelten als zurückhaltend und loyal - eben als diplomatisch. Doch nun haben mehrere dutzend britischer Ex-Spitzenbeamten ihren Premier auf beispiellose Weise kritisiert. Tony Blair solle endlich US-Präsident Bush unter Druck setzen, denn dessen Irak- und Nahostpolitik sei "zum Scheitern verdammt".

Die Ex-Diplomaten forderten Blair auf, seinen "Einfluss als loyaler Verbündeter" zu nutzen. "Falls dies nicht akzeptiert wird oder unwillkommen ist, gibt es keinen Grund, eine Politik zu unterstützen, die zum Scheitern verdammt ist", hieß es in dem Brief.

Der ganze Artikel unter:

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,297146,00.html

[Chem]

Aber mal zum Thema:

"halten George W. Bush für einen gefährlichen Idioten, der nur in schwarz und weiß denkt."

Ein Vorurteil ist dies nur, wenn man es "vor" dem konkreten Handeln dieses Herrn verbreitet hätte.

Inzwischen kann dies kein Vorurteil mehr sein, sondern nur noch eine Tatsache.

Ein Mensch, der anerkannte wissenschaftliche Tatsachen wie z. B. die Evolution ernsthaft in Frage stellt, kann schlichtweg nicht bei gesundem Menschenverstand sein. Bei dem Gedanken, daß so etwas der mächtigste Mann der Welt sein soll, kräuseln sich bei mir die Fußnägel.

Sind die meisten Deutschen wirklich so naiv?

[Joe]

@Sandy,

There has been some chatter here about US military dead coming home. Some think Big Media has a right to make this a story of some type. I do not happen to agree with that.

This is how we treat our dead heroes and how we show our respect in a thousand and one little ways. If there is a member of the military who should die protecting me it is my plan to show my respects to him and to express by sense of personal loss to his or her family.

I think you might find this link to be both a very sad but also in a way uplifting read. I am sure those who live in nations where freedom is given and not earned will not understand this nor do I really expect them too.

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2004/04/taking_chance.html