Freedom of the Press

In Germany, freedom of the press is not so much under threat from the state; if security forces violate the right of editors not to disclose their sources of information, the Federal Constitutional Court intervenes and teaches the state authorities the value of press freedom for democracy. Nowadays, it is the media themselves which pose the greatest risk to the freedom of the press. The quality of journalism is deteriorating because media companies want to make more money out of the media than in the past.

German journalists who start to question their profession can easily find themselves in a situation reminiscent of a centipede who is uncertain which foot to put forward first: it is easy to get confused and trip over. We are not particularly good at defining the way we perceive ourselves, preferring to leave this tricky question to the communications scientists, who may not have a clue, but do have plenty of time to consider the matter. Journalists are no longer so keen to pursue lengthy discussions during editorial meetings, which no doubt has something to do with the economic difficulties which many newspapers are experiencing and the existential fears of quite a number of editors. The old saying “he who pays the piper, calls the tune” suddenly starts to sound more relevant once again.

In its judgements, the Federal Constitutional Court stresses the value of freedom of the press, defending – against attack by the police and public prosecutors – the independence of the press and the rights of journalists and editors to keep their sources of information secret. It calls on the state – for example in its recent judgement relating to a police raid on a German monthly magazine by the name of Cicero – to respect the fundamental value of press freedom for democracy. In other words, whenever the state attempts to shackle the press, Germany’s highest court intervenes to throw off these shackles again: the first time this happened was over forty years ago when the security forces carried out a search of the premises of news magazine Der Spiegel and arrested its publisher, Rudolf Augstein, on the charge of alleged treason; and the same thing happens today when the security forces attempt to push aside the freedom of the press.

A risk to themselves

However, the freedom of the press in Germany is not so much under threat from the state authorities as from the press itself. Far worse than the state’s attempts to shackle the press are the intellectual fetters which journalists impose on themselves: one problem is the mixing of journalism and PR. Another problem concerns the combination of journalism, politics and business, i.e. the fact that more and more journalists are allowing themselves to become the stooges of, above all, business lobbies. The public’s respect for journalism is dwindling as a result; this is accompanied by a corresponding decline in the awareness of the value of press freedom. This is why there are increasing cases of the state searching the editorial offices and private residences of journalists – yet the public’s reaction to this is reserved. There is no longer any appreciation of press freedom, nor any fear of it.

Occasionally, cases come to light in which the telephones of journalists have been tapped by the public prosecutor or police. Worse than these state eavesdroppers, however, are the media managers and financial investors for whom newspapers are simply a means of earning them money, just like any other commodity – and therefore constantly seek to cut editorial costs. Publishing bosses talk about a new concept – the “speeding reporter” who is ready with “laptop and camera close to the scene and who reports online, on air and in print”. A journalist of this ilk is to take responsibility for all media in future – television, radio, online reports and newspapers.

This concept has a name: innovation-mad media managers without the slightest notion of journalism talk of “multifunctional journalists”, claiming simply that times have changed. They say there is no time these days to sit and enjoy a cup of coffee after an editorial meeting, idly spinning the globe. Instead, journalists should get off their backsides and write reports for online publications. They call this modern journalism, close to Joe Public; in reality, however, it means redundancies and a deterioration in working conditions. There are now newspapers which have what is dubbed a “mobile editorial office”, where three editors in a van drive around towns whose local editorial offices have been shut down.

Already, one in three German journalists complains that there is not enough time “to keep abreast of one particular issue”. This jeopardizes the central role of the journalist – to track down new developments, and collect, evaluate and disseminate facts and opinions. There is a risk that German journalism will become superficial and dull – because the pressure on profits is increasing, and because expert, fully qualified journalists are being replaced by multimedia production assistants who know a little about everything and have detailed knowledge about nothing.

Enlightenment skills

Freedom of the press nowadays, 58 years after the establishment of Germany’s constitution, is a basic right enshrined in law. It is so beautifully preserved by the judges at the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe that it could almost still be alive. But only almost: from time to time, the animal is dusted off, set up in front of the class by the biology teacher, who explains what the animal did when it was still alive, when it hunted and ate. Sometimes a miracle occurs, and the freedom of the press suddenly becomes dangerously alive. When a miracle like this does happen, when in other words the press comes too close to those in power, and uncovers a genuine large-scale scandal, this is a moment of glory for journalism. Unfortunately, however, such scandals tend only to last for a limited period of time, and it is not long before, as the German saying goes, another sow is driven through the village. There is a lack of staying power, both in politics and in the media. Nonetheless, those weeks in which investigative journalism sheds light into the dark corners of our community prove to me that the media still possess a certain skill about which I repeatedly have my doubts: the power of the press to enlighten, inform and expose, not to mention its superior revelatory skills. I say this as a political journalist and head of a political department, who used to be a judge and public prosecutor. These moments of glory show just what good journalism can achieve, if only it is given the chance.

A mighty river

Following the cartoon controversy, a fundamental debate raged in Germany: what does freedom of the press mean, and what is done to protect it? Under German law, the freedom of the press is like a mighty river, like the Rhine, Danube or Nile. Not everything which floats in the river is clean, and not everything which drifts along it is precious. The freedom of the press carries valuable and worthless articles, it carries decent and offensive photos, boring and provocative caricatures; and it must also put up with journalists who do not behave in the way one would like someone to behave who claims to be exercising a basic right. Press freedom is not only for products and protagonists of particularly high standing; it does not and must not make distinctions according to quality because otherwise whoever makes the decision about what constitutes good quality would be free to grant and withdraw protection of press freedom as he sees fit.

Freedom of the press is as important to a journalist as independence is to a judge – it represents the basic tenet of their profession. Without independence, there is no justice, and without freedom of the press, there is no good journalism. This press freedom demands, however, that journalists, publishers and media companies accept this responsibility.