Media distrust: “Don’t paint the devil on the wall”
Demonstrations in Salzburg have been going on for over a year: against lockdowns, against compulsory vaccinations, for more freedom. But who are the people who are dying on the street and what moves them there? Konstantin Schätz, communication scientist at the University of Salzburg and journalist, has been intensively involved in the media discussion about the coronavirus pandemic for a year: “The range and a half of people who take to the streets is very broad – and I also believe the reasons why people take to the streets are very diverse. On the one hand this can be fears or worries, on the other hand it can also be false information or even conspiracy theories. “
Traditional media are often an enemy of these demonstrations. The allegations: Lies are being spread, the media are loyal to the government and the second point of view apart from broad scientific opinion has not been heard.
Suspicion of media in the pandemic
Avoid the “wrong balance” of the opinion
In doing so, it is a challenge for journalism to correctly weight different expert opinions, says Schätz: “There is a phenomenon of ‘false balance’, which says: There are different points of view. And when we have 99 virologists who are in agreement – for example on ‘vaccination helps’ – and a hat that contradicts this and you contrast these opinions, then the wrong impression can arise. There is a majority opinion and a minority opinion. “
Sections of society can no longer be reached by journalists – quite a few obtain “alternative facts” via messengers such as Telegram. How far this mistrust of traditional media has advanced – I don’t want to speculate about that.
“All masters turn to serious journalism”
“I think that’s pretty difficult to say. You can’t always paint the devil on the wall now, ”says Schätz. “You also have to see that journalism has become extremely familiar, especially at the beginning of the pandemic – the unique have risen, the visits to online sites have grown. You have to see that: in times of crisis, most people turn to serious journalism and trust it. And journalism simply has to do everything it can to live up to this trust. “
“We have a clear majority for vaccination”
The journalist and book author Ingrid Brodnig, an expert on hate and lies on the Internet, found in the “Salzburg heute” interview that “one should be careful with the word split, because people then quickly get the impression that it is a 50:50 split . But we actually have a clear majority in the population in favor of vaccination. Three quarters of adults have been vaccinated at least once – we can see that the majority are generally ready for the vaccination. “
The second is “that there is a danger, even with the unvaccinated, of those who are most noticeable, who are the loudest, who may also be aggressive or particularly vehement. This is also not the average for the unvaccinated. The danger is that we will see extremes dying, but the unifying element may become less visible. “
Dissatisfaction with “promises not kept”
However, “connecting” is meanwhile also “that large parts of the population are dissatisfied with how the politicians have handled or simply didn’t do it,” adds Brodnig. “That you said, for example, that there would be no lockdown when it was already very obvious. Promises were made that could not be kept. “
In addition, “politics should also take a step back and have medical professionals and scientific experts explain questions about science. Because in part the vaccination debate is also a question of ‘How do I think about the politician xyz?’ But whether I get vaccinated or not shouldn’t be a question of party politics. That actually has nothing to do with it. “
Journalist Brodnig on the division in society
Journalist and author Ingrid Brodnig on the division of society in the pandemic.
Dealing with conspiracy theories in your circle of friends
Most recently, Brodnig also wrote a book on how to deal with conspiracy theories and fake news in a personal conversation with friends and acquaintances: change quickly. It’s more about arousing doubts – ‘Where did you get the information from? Why do you believe that? ‘”
The rare case, however, is “that people have taken vaccination myths and false news like this to heart and became insecure,” adds Brodnig. “You can achieve a lot if you show appreciation and show: ‘I can see that you take this topic seriously, you have one or two concerns – I can understand that’. When I show the person appreciation, it is easier for me to connect with facts. Again, you shouldn’t expect one conversation to change everything. But the more I show the person that I approach them and appreciate them, the more likely the person will be willing to discuss the factual level. “