by Federal Interior Minister
Dr. Wolfgang Schäuble

In the internet age of growing global communications the role played by the media has acquired a singular importance. The character of the media however is changing with national newspapers, broadcasting and TV channels affected by the emergence of phenomena like you tube and my space. Networks like ARD and the BBC are experiencing genuine competition from these new media phenomena..

Because of their global impact the media – old and new – have developed into a major influence on migration and on the integration process. The media help to spread growing awareness of the gaps in living standards, and of economic, political and cultural development across the globe, and this stimulates the urge in the developing world to become part of the societies that have achieved far better results. This means that the media have an important impact on contemporary migration flows.

(…)

Moreover the media also have a direct bearing on the circumstances under which migrants are able to live  in their new countries. They are an important factor in determining the success of integration and whether  the host country is tolerant towards the newcomers and prepared to absorb them.

(…)

In democracies where press freedom is considered an inherent right, the media also have a duty to exercise responsibility in the pursuit of their profession. They will only meet the standards expected of a free press if their coverage is well balanced and conveys an accurate picture of events and situations.  

The internet has brought a new element into news coverage and is confronting established media with a major challenge. Against the new flow of information from a growing variety of sources, competition for public attention is becoming fiercer.. This has put a premium on banality, and conformity and has encouraged sensationalism. In depth analysis and differentiated reportage have become casualties of the internet age.

This is a problem that has to be addressed so as  to preserve a sense of security, to fight prejudice and  maintain a climate of tolerance and solidarity. These are values that cannot be allowed to be destroyed through alarmism. This is where the media have a duty to act responsibly. I hardly need to explain that an exaggerated depiction of threat, one which does not correspond to reality, is more of an obstacle than a help to integration. It is vital for the media to apply objectivity and a sense of proportion  in their reporting.

Naturally this is not to mean that we need an distorted positive version of our coverage. That would be just as damaging. The media is not charged with a formal educational mission. Its job is to inform and to help sovereign citizens  make up their opinions. Journalists must have confidence in the maturity of citizens  and confront them with the plain truth. Unrestricted communication among people is one of the prerequisites of fully functioning free societies. Incidentally I am convinced that one is most likely to change difficult situation if the problem is clearly defined and understood.

(…)

The democratic state is right to be cautious when it comes to regulating the media. At a time in which the classic media are increasingly having to compete with new sources of information, caution is all the more justified.

The state is not qualified – even if it wanted to do it in the interests of public welfare -  to prescribe sober, differentiated, balanced and sensitive reporting. The state is not omnipotent. Indeed for the sake of liberty, it should not be. That is why one always has to remember in dealing with this subject that a free and liberal state cannot enforce everything that by one way or the other it would like to achieve. Imperfection is a precondition to create spaces of freedom which people can be left to fill in whatever ways they chose. In plain language: it is up to them to act with or without responsibility.

In a largely self-regulating media landscape the state can only do one thing: It can urge the media to exercise self-reflection and make itself  an advocate of responsible coverage. This has been one of the aims of the German Islam Conference. One of its Workshops, entitled “Economics and Media”, is designed to address the media image of Islam in Germany. At a later stage it will also discuss how Muslim countries write about “the West”, Germany and the German society.
 
The exchanges reflected agreement that it was desirable for the media to provide a fuller public picture of everyday Muslim life in Germany. Honour killings have considerable news value. Yet it had to be driven home that honour killings are seen as absolute aberrations even within Muslim communities. It needs to be portrayed as interesting that the everyday life of the majority of Muslims in our country - and there are by now over 3 million - is a lot less spectacular and more normal in our terms than some of us believe .We need to see that the coexistence of all people in Germany is not primarily determined by cultural and ethnic or religious differences. And I welcome that very much.

(…)

Of course, the quality of media coverage ultimately depends on the people who work in the media. Freedom of speech and of the press requires the exercise of responsibility by the people involved in media production. As elites they are expected - and are still doing it today - to apply selfcriticism in judging the impact and consequences  of their work.  Responsibility and self-criticism go hand-in-hand.  Those who have influence, power or public authority must be prepared to exercise both. Events like today’s Sanssouci Colloquium are steps in the right direction. I hope that you will take home with you various suggestions and new insights for your work. And I wish that you and all of us  - for ourselves and for our professional duties - are going away from here better aware of our responsibility for a peaceful and free coexistence.

read the complete speech at