Germany reports from ZDF & Sat.1: Television, why are you like that?

Forget true crime, down with the casting shows – German television has a new favorite genre: the politically emotional audio travel report! It deals exclusively with topics that are currently affecting the country. The A country whose journalists have recently been constantly trying to measure its heartbeat and then its temperature in order to determine which crises it will face next.

At the beginning of last week, “Bild” vice-president Paul Ronzheimer presented his first reportage piece for Sat.1, in which he now repeatedly asks: “How's it going, Germany?” On the occasion of the state elections in East Germany, Eva Schulz had already delivered a three-part ZDF series that attempted to find out: “Germany, why are you like that?” For the second episode, different reporters are on the road to check: “What really makes Germany pulse?”

Each time, it's about the big picture: “the new protest culture” (“angry, loud, radical”), “how Saxony is tearing apart” or “the shift to the right in the East and what it means for the whole of Germany.”

And when you watch, you get the impression that the patient who is being examined so constantly is on the verge of finally succumbing to his multimorbidity.

In the end just platitudes

The reports from i&u TV, Drive Beta and Florida Factual are not only all worth watching, but also a sign of tremendous diligence. Because they take the time to let a lot of protagonists with very different views have their say in a whole range of places. Their own difference to the reporters' descriptions is not only similar symptoms, they also stumble over the same hurdles – and all end up in well-meaning helplessness.

At the beginning, however, a whole pile of questions piles up: “What does it mean that more people are taking to the streets again?” Hayali wants to know. “The political climate has become noticeably harsher in recent years, hasn't it? (…) How did that happen?” asks Schulz. Ronzheimer adds: “How do we find our way back together?” And offers: “I want to question, understand, provide clarity and find solutions – for all of us.” Then it starts with the thirty-, forty-five-, ninety-minute all-round check, which is not intended to be a simple report, but rather a “journey” through the country, but mainly the sensitivities of its population.

It is all the more regrettable that all this effort ultimately produces nothing but platitudes.

No one will talk on camera

“We should not lose sight of the search for consensus. To do this, we must continue to talk – even if it sometimes hurts,” says Hayali after speaking to farmers, local politicians and students. Eva Schulz sums up her impressions from Saxony, where she visited AfD city councilors, pastors and demonstrators: “One thing is certain: we have to talk. The question remains: to what point?” Ronzheimer, who does not shy away from conflict with angry officials and protesters (see also DWDL.de TV review), also sums up: “We have to talk to each other much more and take each other seriously – whether in the Bundestag or at the garden fence.”

The curious thing about these pleas for dialogue is that all the films have previously demonstrated impressively that the interest in such an exchange is often very one-sided. And at least not shared by those who are already stuck in their anger at the state, the government, the refugees and the media.

Despite their different temperaments and approaches, all reporters fail in front of the camera to listen to those who feel misunderstood. “I'll tell you how it is: I got endless rejections at this demonstration,” explains Schulz. “People who see themselves as being on the political fringes hardly want to talk to the media and journalists like us at ZDF anymore.” (The film lets those who just didn't want to be filmed speak without any images – well done!)

Completely lost in your own bubble

Hayali tried in vain to talk to participants at the demonstration organized by the organization “Muslim interactive,” which the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution classifies as definitely extremist, after the organizer had previously stated: “We recommend that all those present do not answer questions from journalists.”

And at the replacement summer party of the almost banned “Compact” magazine, Ronzheimer was barely able to get a word in because of all the threats against him – “You'll get your punishment, you media”, “Then you'll get a tree, a rope”, “Fuck off, you have no business being here.” Talking to one another was “almost impossible”, Ronzheimer sighs at one point. And later: “I have the feeling that many people here are completely lost in their right-wing extremist bubble.”

The question is anyway, to what extent journalism that strives for neutrality is obliged to constantly speak to those who have long since positioned themselves on the far right: the former NPD city councillor who is involved with the Free Saxons and covers up his banned calf tattoo for public appearances; the young AfD local politician who is stirring up sentiment against alternative family images on Facebook; the right-wing extremist demonstration organiser who, after the interview, openly threatens the Antifa protesters opposite; the AfD top candidate from Gera, who declares unequivocally: “I don't need you and I don't want to be abused by you.”

The same conversation partner at the same party

These attempts at dialogue may be driven by the hope that the (non-)interviewees will expose themselves through their behavior and statements. However, the collateral damage is that they receive a worrying amount of airtime.

Even the – understandable and correct – impulse to ask ordinary citizens why they feel addressed by the slogans of the right-wing soon exhausts itself in redundancy and disillusionment: “You have beautiful flowers. (…) And what do you think of the AfD?” Ronzheimer asks through an open window in Greiz, Björn Höcke's Thuringian constituency. Another time he wants to know: “What happened that things have become so right-wing here?” He assured the ex-SPD member who is now planning the AfD summer party: “It is important that we talk to each other and listen.” And later on he addresses a married couple with a child: “May I ask you briefly: We work for Sat.1, my name is Paul Ronzheimer. Why does Mr. Höcke fascinate you so much that you want an autograph?” – “I've already given an interview, you know?” – “But not me.”

That's right. But it's my colleague Eva Schulz, who was at the same summer festival with a camera team for her ZDF film at the same time and who had already had to patiently listen to some flimsy justifications for his voting decision from the same man.

Germany, but from the counter

In the end, it is always the same controversial topics that motivate many to show the “old parties” the red card: social injustice and immigration, “gender bullshit” and arms deliveries to Ukraine, ARD-ZDF indoctrination myths and the Greens as the root of social evil.

Of course, as a reporter, you can still make an effort to meet people where they are: in the “Kumpelklause”, where Jürgen and Andreas explain to Eva at the bar that young people no longer see any prospects here; or in the “Reißberg 04”, where the landlord tells Paul behind the tap that Björn has also been there: “The truth comes out at the bar.” But most of them you could somehow already imagine.

The problem is that every time you ask for more specific information, many of the people you talk to start stumbling and stammering, many generalize, shut down, some deny verifiable facts, and insist on their disinformation. And so they paint a picture of a society that finds it difficult or very difficult to convey the complexity of the conflicts of our time – unless it shuts down reflexively beforehand.

Buddy Klitschko in the local inn

In essence, the ambitious reports themselves refute the solution approach they demand to some extent: What is the use of talking to each other when slogans and facts are constantly in competition with each other?

This Germany, whose pulse is constantly being monitored by television, is simply full of irreconcilability and contradictions: Like in Waldheim in Saxony, “at first glance super beautiful and very idyllic,” says Hayali – “but it's not quite so relaxed here,” because protest meets counter-protest. Or in Meiningen in Thuringia, where Ronzheimer experienced a “beautiful little town – wonderful, paradisiacal,” but in which – exactly: protest meets counter-protest.

Of course, you can invite your long-time friend Wladimir Klitschko to the local pub so that he can explain to the local peace activists from his point of view why his country would cease to exist without the arms deliveries from the West, and then “thank you very much for the exchange.” But did it help? I would be skeptical.

Surrendering to the primal journalistic impulse

Curiously, the Germany-feeling reports have their strongest moments when they not limit themselves to listening, but give in to the primal journalistic impulse: to ask critical questions.

In an interview with Dunja Hayali, Palestine activist Yasemin Acar is visibly irritated when asked to explain: “Would you say that you have overshot the mark at one point or another?” In a completely different way, Paul Ronzheimer on Sat.1 does not let up, wanting to hear from Björn Höcke, who is embarrassedly looking in the other direction, what he has to say about the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution's verdict on him (“Mr. Höcke, Mr. Höcke, Mr. Höcke!”), while the “security service” aggressively stands in front of him and the person addressed rushes away (with the words: “Leave us alone here in Thuringia. Go to Berlin, where you belong!”)

This may not have been fought with a sharp sword, but rather with a machete – but it allowed Ronzheimer to draw the apt conclusion that a top AfD politician who had just demanded “Hands off freedom of speech!” in his speech only feels obliged to do so if it benefits him personally. Ronzheimer: “A foretaste of what will happen when this party gains great power.”

Ready to start therapy

The diagnosis seems clear. The country, which has now been thoroughly checked by journalists, has a raised temperature, perhaps even a fever.

But for now, it's probably enough with reportage trips that explore and document the status quo again and again. Instead of dealing with the – admittedly even more complex – facts of what could be done about it. Or, to put it in TV title form: How could it be better, Germany?

And with that: back to Cologne.

“Ronzheimer – How are you, Germany?” is broadcast on Mondays at 8:15 p.m. on Sat.1 and on Joyn; all three reports from “Germany, why are you like that?” can be seen in the ZDF Mediathek; “Am Puls” is also available there.