This should be fundamentally questioned
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2025 6:08 am
But what journalistic self-image lies behind such an assumption? Shouldn't it be the job of national television to question politicians, so that the viewer/voter is as fully informed as possible before making his decision? And what is better for this than critical interviews, detailed portraits and contradictory discussions? Only those who assume that every TV appearance represents automatic free advertising will come to a different conclusion.
Perhaps it would therefore be useful for the SRG to analyse which broadcasting channels are being misused by politicians for pure advertising purposes, such as the short appearances of political novices from the third row of the arena. – and not just a few weeks before the election date. The goal of increased attention spain rcs data was also not achieved. The longer the discussions on the Bundesplatz at prime time, the lower the market share. In the end, it was just 11 percent for an 8 p.m. broadcast – a real slap in the face for viewers. They had used the remote control to protest against the fact that their usual broadcast times, such as the Tuesday crime thriller, were being replaced unnecessarily by a program that was not programmed based on an urgent topic.
Therefore, in purely quantitative terms, the Bundesplatz project was probably more of a contribution to further political disillusionment than to the intended opposite. What can we learn from this? In an increasingly diverse and self-regulating media landscape,with many online offerings and very lively Sunday newspapers, the SRG, with its extensive national domestic monopoly, should examine its attitude to election coverage. This applies to both the programming and the type of broadcasts. And the broadcast guillotine just before the finish line should also be questioned. This causes a counterproductive rush in the weeks before and at the very end leaves the field to the other media and the tough election advertising with a primacy of the moneybag parties and candidates. The well-intentioned offer of the SRG has led to suboptimal results. But if you do the right analyses and learn the necessary lessons, everything will be much, much better next time.
Perhaps it would therefore be useful for the SRG to analyse which broadcasting channels are being misused by politicians for pure advertising purposes, such as the short appearances of political novices from the third row of the arena. – and not just a few weeks before the election date. The goal of increased attention spain rcs data was also not achieved. The longer the discussions on the Bundesplatz at prime time, the lower the market share. In the end, it was just 11 percent for an 8 p.m. broadcast – a real slap in the face for viewers. They had used the remote control to protest against the fact that their usual broadcast times, such as the Tuesday crime thriller, were being replaced unnecessarily by a program that was not programmed based on an urgent topic.
Therefore, in purely quantitative terms, the Bundesplatz project was probably more of a contribution to further political disillusionment than to the intended opposite. What can we learn from this? In an increasingly diverse and self-regulating media landscape,with many online offerings and very lively Sunday newspapers, the SRG, with its extensive national domestic monopoly, should examine its attitude to election coverage. This applies to both the programming and the type of broadcasts. And the broadcast guillotine just before the finish line should also be questioned. This causes a counterproductive rush in the weeks before and at the very end leaves the field to the other media and the tough election advertising with a primacy of the moneybag parties and candidates. The well-intentioned offer of the SRG has led to suboptimal results. But if you do the right analyses and learn the necessary lessons, everything will be much, much better next time.