15 Questions re: Media Ethics being asked in Germany
Questions worth asking of Canadian Media Outlets too!!
Dear international friends of peace, democracy and honest media,
Every war begins with a lie. Let us find a way to end the wars by stopping the lies!
We want to inspire you with a solution for a more honest and open dialogue among all humanity by challenging the main source of injustice: Worldwide Media hypocrisy!
We are creating a world wide information exchange network showcasing countless international creative activities for a peaceful and truthful world.
The Lighthouse Media Evolution was started in Germany, so the bulk of their website is in German. https://leuchtturmard.de
See the English version of LEUCHTTURM ARD here: https://leuchtturmard.de/uk
Currently, its volunteers have carried out four types of activities:
Emailing invitations of peace and other underreported events to mainstream media journalists, inviting them to attend
Holding vigils in front of the offices of the media outlets to remind the media outlets and their directors and employees of their constitutional duty to ensure their reporting includes a multiplicity of perspectives and sources of information.
Inviting journalists and their employers to round table discussions to work on solutions to the problems of biased and one-sided reporting and how that inevitably leads to wars.
Supporting citizens who sought legal means to waive the requirement to pay the mandatory public broadcaster tax on the grounds that the public broadcaster has neglected to fullfil its constitutional mandate - that of ensuring broadcasts reflect multiple perspectives.
Essentially, in the words of former film producer Jimmy Gerum: “We are convinced that free and alternative media is not strong enough to bring truth through to the world. We need to free the mainstream. We need to end decades of hypocracy and misinformation and manipulation. [We need to] create a totally new world of open and honest debate about the problems of our past and the problems of our future. This epic vision needs a strategy, a strategy to enable access to mainstream media, and guess what! There is a possibility!” Hear the rest of his address to the Better Way Conference held in Vienna in September 2022 here: https://leuchtturmard.de/hintergrund/rede-leuchtturmard-de-in-wien-better-way-conference-16-9-2022. He illustrates the power of pubic opinion in impacting the interests of those who have captured the publicly funded broadcasters.
In May 2023, Gerum spoke to a provincial committee looking at the reform of the public broadcast system about a vision that Germany build up the first truly free and independent-of-government public broadcaster. Germany, which already has a large taxpayer base funding the public broadcaster, could lead the way in decoupling the public broadcaster from government interference, for example when it comes to the content being reported on. In his address, Gerum cited German-American historian and philosopher, Hannah Arendt, saying “What good is freedom of opinion, if information is missing?” This was in reference to the censoring out of key information by government-controlled public broadcasters as is the case in Germany. In order for the population to become politically mature and to be involved in solid decision making, people need free and balanced information about key events. Gerum stated that it is a matter of developing the political will, in order to restructure the supervisory committees to ensure more voices from the public lead decision making on behalf of the public broadcaster. Gerum referenced a study involving 18 countries all looking at media reform at the time, including Canada. Currently, there is so much quality journalism available in the internet, but the public broadcaster is not picking it up and presenting it to the public. Also, media education is lacking. It is one thing to superficially declare that certain reports are “fake news”. It is another thing altogether to educate the public to understand the hallmarks of independent and excellent coverage. https://leuchtturmard.de/hintergrund/leuchtturm-ard-im-bayerischen-landtag-am-10-5-23 (in German)
In June 2024, some ‘mainstream’ German newspapers have begun reporting on developments on the legal front - the fourth activity type.
In GERMAN:
(Major newspaper of Frankfurt, Germany)
In ENGLISH:
https://thelightpaper.co.uk/assets/pdf/Light-44-Apr-24-Web-Final.pdf (page 19)
And in support of their third activity type - invitations to Round Table Discussions, the Lighthouse Media Evolution Project has drafted a series of guiding questions.
Lighthouse Media Evolution
Our Questions Regarding the Current Ethics of Journalism
1. Humanity Desires Peace, Understanding, and Diplomacy
This desire is one of the greatest achievements of our civilization's history. Our elected officials are advised and influenced by very powerful lobbyists, in particular by lobbyists of the military-industrial complex, major pharmaceutical companies and other corporate, profit driven interests. People's opinions are influenced by mainstream media, in Europe especially by taxpayer funded public broadcasters. How is it that the public broadcasters and other corporate backed mainstream media are predominantly biased towards the opinions of lobbyists and convey those interests to the people? Where are the ethical principles in support of peace (instead of more military conflict), understanding (instead of the vilification of other opinions) and diplomacy (instead of disrespect)? These should all carry much more weight than corporate interests.
2. Loss of Trust
The presence of high-quality, independent, and investigative news portals on the internet has clearly been making the bias of mainstream media reporting obvious to viewers. This is the leading reason for loss of trust in the mainstream media today. Why do you, as mainstream media, not follow the example of these internet offerings which touch topics of vital importance without the bias of corporate lobby interests? Why have your programs been ignoring or defaming this development for years already, a development that has increasingly provided a much-needed multiplicity of perspectives?
3. Journalism Often Misused by Political Interests
When critical viewers can see how journalists are misused by political interests, one must wonder why journalists themselves are not aware of the misuse in which they are participating. The misuse often becomes apparent or is properly identified and investigated only after many years. There are plenty of examples of government funded media pushing geopolitical and military interests at the expense of human lives. Examples include the Balkan Wars, the Incubator Lie during the Iraq War in 1991, the prehistory of the Ukraine conflict, Libya, and more. Why does the mainstream media not engage in historical reappraisal to regain trust in public broadcasting?
4. Lack of Courage in Journalism
Why does government and corporate backed journalism lack the courage to interpret and present the latest findings of historical events? For example, addressing topics like the murder of President John F. Kennedy and 9/11 with the latest findings can help regain the people’s trust in the media. The longer information like the study of the collapse of the third building on 9/11 by Professor Leroy Hulsey at the University of Fairbanks remains unaddressed, the less trust there is in your independence.
5. Marginalization of Brave Journalists
Why are courageous journalists like Patrik Baab (of the NDR in Germany) or dual Canadian/American journalist Eva Bartlett, marginalized instead of being honoured for their courage and investigative work? Where are the days of journalists like Gary Webb (featured in the movie “Kill the Messenger”)?
6. Avoidance of Open Discussion in Talk Shows
Why do all talk shows avoid open discussion with critics of Western hegemony, even though Western interests often demonstrably violate human dignity? How can trust arise when Western values are merely given lip service and hypocrisy abounds?
7. Implications of Political Manipulation
Being aware of political manipulation in the past can help people recognize manipulation in the present. Therefore, good journalism must always make underlying interests visible. (For example, whose interests were served when Boris Johnson interfered in the nearly completed Ukraine Russia peace deal in 2022? Or when the Nordstream Pipeline was sabotaged, creating the largest ever unreported environmental disaster of our time?) Historical reappraisal, i.e. looking back on past events without bias, can create new trust in the media outlets that dare to report on political manipulation of events. Who bears the responsibility when this almost never happens?
8. Wikipedia and Political Manipulation
Wikipedia is now the world's leading encyclopedia. Unfortunately, many of its articles demonstrate political manipulation. This is a matter of general interest. There are privately funded, hour-long documentaries on the internet about this. When will public broadcasters take on the necessary educational work and present similar documentaries taking a critical look at modern day censorship in all its forms?
9. Job Security for Journalists
Journalists working for public broadcasters without permanent contracts cannot be brave and independent without risking their assignments. When will a supportive incentive system and strong legal backing for investigative journalism be established? When will you ensure job security for those editors who authorize inconvenient investigations?
10. Reporting on the Lighthouse Media Evolution Initiative
When will there be reporting on the serious intentions of the Lighthouse initiative, which has been demanding balanced and state-independent public broadcasting with vigils in over 50 cities for 100 weeks?
11. Violation of Broadcasting Standards and Journalism Ethics During the COVID Crisis
When will there be an open reappraisal of the significant violations of press ethics codes that have occurred throughout the COVID crisis?
12. Importance of Financial Transactions
When will there be reporting on the importance of financial transactions and the resulting significant dangers to our democracy? For example, which foundations with which political interests finance “fact-checkers”? Which of the “non-state actors” of the World Health Organizations have which sway on behalf of which backers? To what degree is editorial content of which media organizations, which publishers, which scientific and medical journals, reliant upon advertising and sponsorship revenue from which sources? What impact does the “money trail” have on the objectivity of the media?
13. Organizations Constructing International Narratives
When will there be reporting on organizations like the "Trusted News Initiative," "Project Syndicate," or "Google News Initiative" that demonstrably reinforce bias and construct international narratives contrary to the general interest? Who is investigating the investment interests of the social media companies who have partnered with media organizations in the the pursuit of “Truth”, given their capabilities of surveilling their users and manipulating content in directions that primarily serve their own, not the public interest?
14. Narrowing of Discourse Among Editors
We hear from many editors about the narrowing of discourse, with critical topics increasingly being rejected. The resulting self-censorship is a serious and worsening issue. When will this be publicly discussed?
15. Need for Independent Public Broadcasting
We urgently need public broadcasting, with balanced reporting independent of the state and without regard to individual political and economic interests. Why can't publicly funded media achieve independence, especially in countries where citizens are compelled to pay for this service through mandatory government directed fee payments?
A creative and democratic future society needs dialogue and an open and fair discourse about the evident ethical failings in global journalism.
For 100 weeks, we have invited you, our publicly funded broadcasters, to join us in finding solutions to the above list of problems. We have proposed round tables mediated by competent experts in order to work through these problems jointly. Unfortunately, for 100 weeks, we have documented your choice to ignore our invitation - your silence towards this dialogue offer is a sad testament to a declining democracy!