The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

Final round of elections on ARD and ZDF: a little bit of North Korea, a little bit of British lower house

2021-09-25T06:55:26.966Z


Hard questions, soft answers: Tina Hassel and Theo Koll confidently followed up on the septet for the federal election, but rarely made the debate sparkle. Does democratic discourse need such events?


Enlarge image

Moderators Tina Hassel and Theo Koll: Ready for the kickstart?

Photo: CLEMENS BILAN / POOL / EPA

A strong kick-start that Tina Hassel and Theo Koll gave in the final round of ARD and ZDF.

In view of the murder of a gas station cashier by a mask refuser in Idar-Oberstein, they started their show with the topic of radicalization and right-wing extremism.

The moderators had largely excluded this in the previous election duels - as if they had not wanted to expose themselves to the accusation of driving the division tendencies within society with really difficult questions.

Hassel and Koll took the seven top candidates plus CSU boss Markus Söder on Thursday evening, at least initially pointedly, so that excuses were hardly possible.

Spoiler: Of course they were.

Hassel, addressing CDU leader Armin Laschet: "The Union has prevented the defensive democracy law." What do you say when Kubicki says he went to bars during the lockdown? "Koll to Alice Weidel (AfD):" Wouldn't it be time to distance yourself from the scene? "

more on the subject

  • Last TV debate before the election: a mixed heptathlon at the end

  • Elephant round before the election: If everyone is talking, nobody says anything

The rejection of the Union to measures to support anti-fascist institutions.

The rejection that the left cherishes against the protection of the constitution.

The FDP top candidate of a federal state that is free to disregard corona restrictions.

A party that repeatedly flirts with corona deniers and lateral thinkers.

Hassel and Koll opened their final round of the federal election with extremely pointed references to questionable processes within the parties of their guests.

"Like in North Korea!"

In fact, some of the participants reached their arguments at their limits. Laschet replied to the defensive democracy question that no law would help against right-wing radicalism (what else?). The only thing that occurred to Lindner was that one had to ask Mr. Kubicki himself "about his personal rules" (does she have power with Lindner's tolerance?). Weidel warned against "stigmatization" of the right fringe (because she wants to hug him?).

So the top executives of the seven parties weren't really lured out of the reserve, but at least they weren't able to put election campaign dumps right at the beginning. Instead, one could hope that there might be some argumentative unleashing. Spoiler again: It didn't really come about. Instead, the willow, dissatisfied with the course of the discussion, crowed off-screen at the end of the radicalism block: "As in North Korea!"

North Korea, of course, was far away.

At least if one taps the final round to see whether all the customs of a democratic debate have been adhered to.

They did, of course, and very strictly.

Almost so strict that a bit of North Korea feeling arose in the formalization of the course of the event.

After full throttle at the beginning, there were always opportunities for those present to present themselves, for example when they were supposed to explain how they pay attention to climate protection in their everyday life.

A template for PR chatter - the SPD chancellor candidate Olaf Scholz found so boring that he refused to answer.

Because, as he rightly said, as a politician with a bodyguard and armored glass limousine, he doesn't have a normal everyday life.

Scholz noted and remained vague

Apart from such moments, Hassel and Koll presented themselves quite aggressively and above all: well coordinated.

The capital city studio manager from ARD and the capital city studio manager from ZDF were able to regain some of the trust in the public broadcasters that went wrong in the first, disastrously uncoordinated election triumph with Oliver Köhr and Maybrit Illner.

However, the specific bureaucratic demands on such a type of event also ensured a certain static in the discussion: If seven people are to have an equal say in 90 minutes, there is not much room for surprises.

more on the subject

  • Wahl-TV in ARD and ZDF: That's why the moderation of the Triells was so miserable by Christian Buß and Alexander Kühn

  • Triell for the Chancellery: Two argue, one scores by Kevin Hagen, Valerie Höhne and Christian Teevs

For the correct arrangement of the debaters, it was decided to use a kind of bent-up horseshoe, at the ends of which, together with Weidel and Wissler, the representatives of the ends of the right and left spectrum were placed.

After the election TV annoyance before, everything should run correctly - which it didn't do because Markus Söder wasn't invited to the CSU top candidate (that's Alexander Dobrindt), but to the CSU party chairman.

Ah?

This already coincided with the desired arithmetic of the program, which had been announced as the »final round of top candidates«.

"I asked a clear question!"

Despite such flaws, Hassel and Koll made a confident figure for long stretches. Also because they were always extremely tough against the chattiness attacks of their guests. When Scholz absolutely did not want to be specific about the rental cover, Koll insisted: "And one more answer to the question!" / "I had asked a clear question!" / "Have we already found out everything!" / "So no rental cover guaranteed? "/" Guaranteed no rent cover? "Scholz noted and remained vague, what should you do.

There were, however, a few enlightening exchanges.

For example when it came to future investment measures.

In the direct clinch between FDP top candidate Lindner and Green top candidate Annalena Baerbock it became clear how far and how irreconcilably the two, who may soon be entering into coalition talks, are apart on this issue.

There wasn't a bit of North Korea in the air in terms of sharpness and enthusiasm for discussion, but rather a bit of the British House of Commons.

The question that remains is whether a final round, with its large and therefore inevitably sluggish tableau of people and its many formal constraints, can ever be a great moment in the democratic culture of debate.

Before the next election, it is imperative that we talk about new conversation formats.

Source: spiegel

All life articles on 2021-09-25

You may like

Trends 24h

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.