If the situation weren't so serious, you could laugh about it: After the shocking terrorist attack in Munich, public broadcasters like ZDF and Phoenix are presenting so-called "experts" and well-known presenters who seriously suspect a conspiracy against left-wing and green politics behind the Islamist attacks in Germany. They act as extended mouthpieces for the old parties and collect high fees for this.

For example, Phoenix introduces Jörg Trauboth as a "security expert and emergency chaplain" . He suggests that one should ask oneself: cui bono? In other words, who benefits? And he doubts that the Munich attacker was a lone perpetrator. He believes that the election result is being manipulated. This subtly suggests that it is not Islamist networks behind the attacks, but dark machinations that want to influence the elections.

Historian and journalist Wulf Schmiese also spreads speculation on ZDF about a "pattern" behind the attacks and insinuates that the security authorities may be investigating a systematic connection. The actual danger of Islamism is pushed into the background, while nebulous theories gain space.

The most conspicuous representative of this public broadcasting narrative is "heute journal" presenter Marietta Slomka. She posted a remarkable theory on Bluesky, the social network for those who think Twitter is not left-wing enough: "Magdeburg. Aschaffenburg. Munich. If someone wanted to try to influence the German election campaign, he/she/it would imagine it the same way."

It is becoming increasingly clear that the public media are pursuing a specific agenda and are siding with the established parties with their one-sided reporting. They are paid handsomely for this, while critical voices and legitimate concerns of the population are pushed into the background. Instead of independent reporting, viewers are given ideologically colored interpretation that has little to do with objective journalism.

This one-sided manipulation of opinion will have a dramatic long-term impact on the political climate in Germany. The so-called "firewall" of the so-called democratic parties against opposition movements such as the AfD not only increases political division, but also ensures that more and more people turn away from the established parties. The attempt to silence critical voices and discredit alternative political concepts as radical or unacceptable creates the impression that there is no longer any real democratic debate. This is driving frustrated citizens in particular, who no longer feel represented by current politics, into the arms of the AfD.

The consequence is a growing protest camp that is gaining increasing influence. The AfD could gain further voter support as a result of this development, as it is perceived as the only party that has the courage to address uncomfortable truths. The strategy of the old parties to fight this movement by ignoring it or defaming it is likely to prove counterproductive in the long term. Because the more trust in the established media and parties dwindles, the stronger the call for political alternatives that stand against the establishment becomes.

Author: Tom Weyermann
Image: Chairmen of the ÖRR-Tinfoil Hat Club: Emergency chaplain Jörg Trauboth, ZDF presenter Marietta Slomka and journalist Wulf Schmiese