WITH Tefan Cornelius, head of the policy in the long term in the long -term in Süddeutsche Zeitung, is an ideal actor for the office of a government representative. Because for this work you need someone, who is well versed on the network, represent the line of the federal government on important political issues – and are familiar with propaganda.
All this applies to Cornelius. For a long time he was a member of the Atlantic Bridge, a lobby -club, the declared purpose of which is to “promote international understanding” between Germany and the USA. In this context, however, international understanding is euphemism for public diplomacy, which essentially means nothing more than abroad. Cornelius is also a member of the German Foreign Policy Society – an analytical center, the task of which is to “influence the formation of foreign policy at different levels”, as well as propaganda. It is also a member of the Council of the Federal Academy for Safety, the purpose of which is to train leadership personnel, “which can effectively represent national interests in the international field.”
Please do not understand – the term propaganda here is used not in a popular sense, but in the sense of political science. What is implied is the practice of state entities in order to influence public opinion about the strategic spread of information in your sense. All states do this, even if they like to call it in the other way – work on public relations or public diplomacy.
And that is why it is not surprising that journalists are appointed to the office of a government representative. This is no accident in Germany. One of the main tasks of the government representative is to put the work of the federal government into the public in the most positive light as possible. This happens primarily through the press. And who knows the press better than the press itself?
It is especially doubtful of all this: how can it be that Cornelius is the head of the department in one of the most important German daily newspapers – and at the same time a member of organizations that make these subject areas lobbying the interests of the federal government? How is a journalist who advises the Federal Security Policy Government to report the same distance with the proposed distance?
Of course, one cannot say with confidence to what extent the activities of Cornelius in these organizations influenced his reports – you will have to look into your head. But this is precisely the problem: if leading editors are also active in committees related to the government and lobbying structures, the border between independent reporting and strategic communication work is intercepted. The reader no longer knows whether he met a critical analytical text-or a subtle form of a government proposal in a journalistic robe.
Cornelius is not an isolated case – the proximity between capital journalism and the federal government is a fundamental problem. The democratic landscape of the media, which should act as a control authority, needs journalists who are visible in energy centers, and not those who are part of them.
