The scandal surrounding “Klar”: How the public broadcaster is dealing with its own new format
Although other anti-immigration programs have been broadcast before, the backlash against this format was brutal. Why, exactly?
"What comes next might appeal to some." Is that a good start for a column? Not really. Because this sentence already implies an effect, even before the content is discussed.
In this respect, I can certainly understand some of the criticisms of the new ARD reporting format "Klar." The co-production between NDR and BR premiered at the beginning of April. And Julia Ruhs, the show's omnipresent host, opened the first episode with the words: "What comes next might not appeal to everyone." A somewhat unfortunate formulation, because, first of all, a political magazine should definitely not try to please everyone. That claim should be left to pop shows.
And secondly, there's no need for this kind of provocative introduction. The title of the show— "Migration: What's Going Wrong" —was provocative enough.
However, I found this opening of the new reportage format not provocative, but enlightening. And also touching. The thematic framework is based on the tragic story of 17-year-old Ann-Marie Kyrath, who was killed on a regional express train a good two years ago – by a man who appeared to be mentally disturbed, the Palestinian refugee Ibrahim A. Her friend Danny, who intervened, also died.
"Klar" accompanies Ann-Marie's father, among other things, on his visit to the Bundestag, "where on this day the topic is the tightening of asylum laws." Michael Kyrath is very outspoken in his criticism of politics. He sees uncontrolled migration as the cause of his daughter's death. But he always remains calm and considered, choosing his words carefully. An absolute stroke of luck for the reportage. The fact that Kyrath is shown with tears in his eyes in the very first shot, however, strikes me as strange. The tears of Ann-Marie's friends at the end of the film, on the other hand, touch me. And what I see and hear in the 40 minutes in between, while hardly surprising in terms of content, is nevertheless striking enough in its clarity.
For example , Denmark's Social Democratic Minister for Immigration and Integration, Kaare Dybvad , has his say. He justifies his government's new, tough stance on refugee policy by arguing that uncontrolled migration primarily burdens the poor—the Social Democrats' original electorate. And Dybvad considers the fact that rejected asylum seekers are allowed to remain in Germany "unsustainable."
Stuttgart Police Chief Markus Eisenbraun presents the results of an internal study on the increasing number of knife attacks in the state capital of Baden-Württemberg. According to the study, the typical suspect is male, under 24 years old, and has a migrant background. Levi Salomon of the "Jewish Forum for Democracy and Against Antisemitism" laments the increasing acceptability of antisemitic sentiments, particularly from radical Muslims and left-wing extremists. "Klar" accompanies Salomon to a pro-Palestinian demonstration, where he is repeatedly verbally and physically attacked.
Yes, the tenor of this program is truly clear: It's about the complex problems of uncontrolled immigration into Germany . And that's not a new tone for public broadcasters. For example, in October 2024, RBB broadcast a report titled "Limits of Immigration," in which Berlin Police Chief Barbara Slowik Meisel commented on the sharp increase in knife attacks: "Violence in Berlin is male, young, and non-German."
And in the ZDF report “Exhausted Welcome Culture” from February of this year, it is said again and again: “We are at our limit!” – whether in the immigration office, in the German District Council, in schools or by migrants who have lived here for decades and have painstakingly built a livelihood for themselves.
Honestly, I don't see any major differences to "Klar." Nevertheless, those shows haven't been subjected to the fierce wave of criticism that is now sweeping over the creators of the new format. The fact that ZDF satire actor Jan Böhmermann defames the show as "right-wing populist nonsense" seems more like free advertising.
On the other hand, I find the very personal framing of ZDF journalist Nicole Diekmann towards her 34-year-old colleague Julia Ruhs tasteless: "If you advertise your format by showing who thinks you're stupid, you're either still a teenager at heart, or you don't have much confidence in yourself and your product." Oops, is this the way out of hate and incitement on the Internet that Diekmann supposedly shows in her book "The Shitstorm Republic"?
But what's really intriguing is the letter some NDR employees wrote a few days after the premiere of "Klar," criticizing the show. This letter, however, wasn't addressed to their colleagues, the show's creators, but to the station's top management. Criticism is actually a good thing. But when it's played out through the wire, I suspect there's little constructive content behind it. Especially since the authors even went so far as to demand that the collaboration with Julia Ruhs be reviewed and the show removed from the ARD media library, as it contradicted the educational mission of public broadcasting. Strong stuff!
They are now publicly seeking support for these demands on the Campact petition page. Out of interest, I looked into the journalistic credentials of the initiator of this petition, Torben Ritzinger – and didn't find much: an article about women's soccer in the Braunschweiger Zeitung and a few interviews he gave as a spokesperson for the Last Generation. Oh well, okay.
His colleague is Milad Kuhpai, and he works primarily as a news anchor at NDR. Kuhpai's parents are from Iran, which may be why he's a bit sensitive about the topic of migration. In any case, I have my doubts as to whether the two of them should really go so far as to attack their colleagues from "Klar" in such a way. Although: public colleague bashing on public broadcasting – that's something. It's not a new phenomenon, but it hasn't been brought to the public's attention quite so much until now.
It's just a guess, but perhaps Ritzinger and Kuhpai meet up with the "New German Media Makers" for pizza every evening. The NGO, funded with €840,000 in state money, described the pilot episode of "Klar" as a "low point in public broadcasting reporting" because it allegedly lacked fact-based and nuanced reporting. And that's not all: The opinion activists are calling on the public to put pressure on NDR and BR to shut down the show. These are very similar strategies.
But never mind: If it's a given from the outset that every public broadcaster program must follow the same pattern to meet journalistic standards, why do we need 20 public television stations and more than 70 radio stations? For 10 billion euros, surely you can expect some variety. Maybe even a little bit of dissent, à la Kienzle and Hauser. For the benefit of all the new media makers: These two dedicated journalists directed and moderated the ZDF political magazine "Frontal" for many years – together, but always confrontationally, right versus left. Today, that would be almost a revolution. But back then, it was more of a step backward. In the past, the motto at the public broadcaster was: Not every program needs to and should be balanced, but the entire program.
I see the first issue of "Klar" as an attempt to move in that direction again. And I consider it a correct and important step.
Let’s see if the decision-makers at ARD see it the same way.
Berliner-zeitung
