The press - too much uncontrolled power?

Recently, the press has been in focus of many important incidents and seems to become interesting for people once again, because there is so much happening in the world and because an increasing number of observers of the media starts to question the role which broadcasting corporations and newspapers are playing. The actual function of the press was always, to have an eye on politics, to watch out for unrighteousness and to inform the public. Thats why the press earned itself the name „4^th power“, leaving open the question, who watches over the press. When you see the pictures of several German televison transmitters on the conflict in the Ukraine, you will soon find out, that they all have the same message. Conspiracy-fans and Pegida-supporters have lost their fate in the press and say, they have been manipulated from the government. Actually it would make sense for the government, because the media is the direct contact to the population, the press decides how much everybody can know and in this way, can indirectly controll our opinion. That's why totalitarianisms usually block the freedom of press, remember the Nazi-propaganda, so that they can controll their country more easy, the press is almost all the time an uncomfortable itch for every government, but it is needed in every democracy. Let's have a short look at some cases, in which the 4^th power came into action.

In 1972, five masked men tried to install wires in the democratic office, which was opposing president Richard Nixon in the upcoming presidential election. The men were busted by the police and arrested. The Washongton Post started to investigate the case and soon found out, that there were connections between president Nixon to the burglars. Even though Nixon won the election and the White House threatened journalists, the Washington Post kept their investigations running and were credited with an investigation committee which made it necessary for the president to resign from office in 1974. All the cover-up and the pressure onto the Washington Post did not save Nixon and proved the power of the press in the United States. The public would have never heard about the burglars and the background of the break-in if the newspaper wouldn't have acted. There aren't many institutions who can make the most powerful man in the world flee the throne.

Unfaortunately there are also examples which made the press look like an inquisition for public issues. Everybody knows the case of Jörg Kachelmann, ther German weather anchorman who was accused of raping a woman. Kachelmann assured his innocence, but the press was already pleading him guilty while the process was still running. Today we know, that Kachelmann is innocence, but his image is ruined, no television corporation would sign him anymore. The press released a so called „shitstorm“, which is a term used by the German press since 2010 and describes any clamour of outrage on the internet. Especially by posting and writing in social media. The public just totally destroyed Kachelmanns life by initiation of the press. This shows us how dangerous the power of the press is, it can not just bring the president of the United States of America to despair, but it can also hit every citizen who has bad luck and is maybe at the wrong time at the wrong place.

In december of 2010 protests and rebellions throughout the arabic world shocked the autocratic systems in many states. For example in Egypt and Lybia the revolters removed their rulers, while in lybia a civil war broke loose and in Syria the conflict between the government and the opposition still goes on. Although the rebellions took place on the streets, new media had a big influence on the political changes in various countries. At first Facebook was the major tool which were used to inform the world about the protests taking place. While almoust all television transmitters were controlled by the states governments, the Qatar’ transmitter Al-Jazeera showed pictures and videos from every form of social media to help the movement grow. In Tunisia the rebellion started when Mohamed Bouazizi publicly burned himself to death. Bloggers strated to inform about the protests and although the internet-censorship was very strict, it was possible to inform the world about the corruption of the Ben Ali Regime. This led to the Jasmine Revolution and suddenly to the fall of Bel Ali Clan. In Egybt the public demonstrations against the Hosni Mubarak regime began when Khalid Said, a young blogger, was murdered. Soon later the facebook group „We are Khalid Said“ was established and In January of 2011 the demonstrations started and everything was filmed, put on to youtube and broadcasted in Egypt by Al-Jazeera. The Egypt government was scared and shut down the whole internet, but Al-Jazeera broadcasted from another satelite and Google provided a way for the protesters to still reach the internet. Besides, it was not possible to stop the flow of information to foreign contries, due to videos and tweets being send on servers in other contries. This shows that new media can be used as a tool of self-empowerment and to spread important information independently, it opens up a huge new field for politically motivated young people to express their oppinion. But it is also scary how quickly information and ideas spread through these new forms of media and of corse it is not impossible that twitter or other forms of new media will be used as propaganda to controll and keep quiet a population.

To come to a conclusion, one must say, that the media is needed to watch over the government in the checks-and-balances system, every true democracy needs a free press. Without it, the government is absolutely free to do whatever they want and can cover up everything they dont want the public to know. The press though has to watch out that it uses the power it is given the right way, that they dont try to penetrate peoples privacy and watch carefully over the information they are given. In todays society, little piece of information can destroy peple's life and ruin their public image. Theo Peters and Juri Häbler