Relotius Affair: A Dark Page in the History of Journalism

[Abdülmecid I]

To summarize, Claas Relotius, a renowned journalist mainly working in Spiegel, but also having cooperated with various German newspapers, has been revealed to have regularly fabricated or drastically distorted the stories he published. Not coincidentally, his articles concerned exclusively international events, from traumatized children in Iraq to imprisoned Yemenis in Cuba. His fraud was exposed, when a colleague of his noticed some serious discrepancies in a piece about the US-Mexican border and concluded, after a careful investigation, that Relotius simply invented the juicy details about a company of vigilantes patrolling southern Texas. After pressure, Relotius admitted the embarrassing truth, while his employers are have already publicly apologized.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

This unfortunate incident underlines the weaknesses of modern journalism, whose quality is threatened by the contradiction between the profit-seeking goals of an enterprise and the moral duty of journalism to tell the truth. Foreign affairs are traditionally considered as the Achilles' heel of journalism, because information is difficultly obtained, so ruthless governments and individual opportunists have many chances to spread propaganda, thanks to the practical obstacles against verification. In this case, Relotius objectives probably concerned money and fame, similarly to the crafty operators of the fake-news factory in Macedonia, as there is not a noticeable agenda in his stories. Awkwardly enough, Relotius has won and been nominated for a great number of awards (from CNN to German institutions), including one about Syria, which was awarded with the European Press Prize and is now suspected to be at least partially misleading. He's also responsible for promoting the story of an FBI "agent" seduced by a German rapper that had joined ISIL.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

It's really ridiculous to watch how foolishly the strongest European magazine and a bunch of supposedly professional committees were manipulated by a young reporter, eager to lie, in order to advance his career. His deception was not even particularly sophisticated, because he didn't hesitate to even plagiarize images from other articles, a bold tactic which meant that even an amateur knowing the basics of Google search could detect his tricks. He targeted especially the Syrian Civil War (a conflict marked by controversies like the lesbian girl of Damascus and victims white-washing their kidnappers), presumably due to correctly assuming that human tragedy generates interest and therefore income. In my opinion, in a time when mainstream media are justly or unjustly reprimanded for lacking professionalism, while bigoted charlatans desperately attempt to replace them, the Relotius disaster convincingly illustrates the principal issues faced by the press.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Even a magazine like Spiegel, is hardly motivated to confirm eloquently written stories about global controversies, which can attract viewers and thus increase the profits of the company. Meanwhile, awards are given lightheartedly, as nobody is willing to waste his precious time for an otherwise thankless job, apart from the awards-night party. Public exposure and scrutiny could perhaps encourage the editors to take their work more seriously, but, as long as the prosperity of a TV channel and any other media company depends on the fortunes of the stock market, I personally doubt that the future of journalism is going to be bright.

[HannibalExMachina]

but, but, public media is the real enemy?

[conon394]

So what next you are to post about how catholic priests are not all saints, that professional athletes cheat, wives and husbands have affairs, FIFA is corrupt, business cuts corners and violate regulations, political leaders take bribes, people inflate the CVs, academics falsify data or steal credit for the work of others, some employees don't wash their hands after using the bathroom, and god forbid are you going tell me used car salesmen are absolutely honest...

[Karnil Vark Khaitan]

...FIFA is corrupt...

I am Sorry when are they NOT!

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

At least a Spiegel colleague discovered the Fraud and Spiegel plays with open cards.

[Aexodus]

At least this man’s career will be ruined and an example to others. In part this is why a public broadcaster like BBC is so good despite its faults, it's run to be impartial first, profits second.

[Katsumoto]

It's really an unfortunate incident, especially at a time when journalism is so important, but I'm not sure about elevating this to 'a dark page in the history of journalism.' It was one guy. Journalists making up stories or sources is nothing new. I'm also a bit confused about this line:

as long as the prosperity of a TV channel and any other media company depends on the fortunes of the stock market, I personally doubt that the future of journalism is going to be bright.'

How else could it function if not dependent on the stock market or profit? State broadcasters are fine if they are well funded and independent, but usually the two factors are mutually exclusive - if it's well funded, it's a mouthpiece of the government, if it's independent, it can't afford expansive reporting (the exception being the BBC as mentioned, but even they catch plenty of flak from 'concerned taxpayers').

I too would like to see news organisations solely dedicated to reporting the truth, but the fact is reporting the truth is a profitable business, and without more publicly funded independent news companies, 'news for profit' is what we're stuck with.

[Aexodus]

The BBC is indeed both independent and fairly well funded, though yes it definitely isn’t perfect: however that is a bias issue not so much a fake news issue per se.

[Big War Bird]

The most successful charlatans thrive by telling people what they want to hear. I have a hunch that his stories made his readers feel good about themselves and made his readers' boogeymen look bad. My personal creedo when reading the news, Be skeptical of all reports that contradict what you believe to be true. And that goes double when its the other way around.

[Heathen Hammer]

Any mainstream media is first and foremost, a propaganda outlet for people that own it, be it a government or a private corporation. As a result, we have mainstream "free press" spout lies all the times, be it about smear campaign on political opposition to scary stories about some foreign country to justify invading it. So this isn't really a "dark page in history of journalism", but more like a "typically dark page in dark books of mainstream propaganda masquerading as journalism"

[conon394]

The most successful charlatans thrive by telling people what they want to hear. I have a hunch that his stories made his readers feel good about themselves and made his readers' boogeymen look bad. My personal creedo when reading the news, Be skeptical of all reports that contradict what you believe to be true. And that goes double when its the other way around.

And you just are fortunate enough to know the truth? In this the man was not very successful for very long. He got caught after just one year on staff at the Magazine. He is 33 so I assume he likely had a journalism degree or something similar so than only 9 years into his career and he flamed out in the way they will likely kill it. So we a case of professional misconduct that seems to have been dealt with swiftly. Before we sounding so dramatic about a dark page and all that It worth remember that in large rigorous surveys something like 40-60% of collage students admit to cheating so its not gasp a surprise some professionals will cheat. But be my Guest big War Bird find me some data that there is more willful professional dishonesty in Main Stream Journalism that goes unpunished than in say any other field.

[athanaric]

At least a Spiegel colleague discovered the Fraud and Spiegel plays with open cards.

It's doubtful they learned anything useful from it, though, as this column points out:
https://www.salonkolumnisten.com/fue...-sein-koennte/

[Derpy Hooves]

It's really an unfortunate incident, especially at a time when journalism is so important

When is it never so important. Trump being president doesn't make journalism any more or less important.

[Big War Bird]

And you just are fortunate enough to know the truth?

I'm amazed you read a simple reminder to be skeptical of too convenient narratives as if I might have special wisdom. Are you meaning to say you have never considered being skeptical of second hand reports?

In this the man was not very successful for very long. He got caught after just one year on staff at the Magazine. He is 33 so I assume he likely had a journalism degree or something similar so than only 9 years into his career and he flamed out in the way they will likely kill it.

Perhaps you and I define a successful charlatan a bit differently. Nine years of awards and accolades seems adequate to me.

So we a case of professional misconduct that seems to have been dealt with swiftly. Before we sounding so dramatic about a dark page and all that It worth remember that in large rigorous surveys something like 40-60% of collage students admit to cheating so its not gasp a surprise some professionals will cheat. But be my Guest big War Bird find me some data that there is more willful professional dishonesty in Main Stream Journalism that goes unpunished than in say any other field.

It is reasonable to expect some base level of fraud to exist to in any field, you are correct in that. What stands out in journalism is that the weight of misreporting, biases and frauds seem to lean reliably in one political direction.

[Abdülmecid I]

It's really an unfortunate incident, especially at a time when journalism is so important, but I'm not sure about elevating this to 'a dark page in the history of journalism.' It was one guy. Journalists making up stories or sources is nothing new. I'm also a bit confused about this line:

It was supposed to be a question, but I managed to forget the question mark. In my opinion, the most embarrassing aspect of the scandal is the inadvertent involvement and cooperation of so many respectable institutions, from the strongest magazine in Europe to the largest TV channel in the United States. Ironically, the former boasts of employing a great team of fact-checkers, whose role, however, is apparently limited to determining whether the "objective" information included (such as the names of government officials, geography and etc.) corresponds to reality, instead of actually verifying the claims of the story. As you said, it is very possible that the incident will be exploited to promote their own fake-news blogs and YOUTUBE accounts, so this lack of diligence on behalf of Spiegel and CNN, despite the absence of any malevolent intention, is completely unacceptable. Because of their unprofessional attitude, they allowed a reckless fraud to base his career on the reputation of their authority.

How else could it function if not dependent on the stock market or profit? State broadcasters are fine if they are well funded and independent, but usually the two factors are mutually exclusive - if it's well funded, it's a mouthpiece of the government, if it's independent, it can't afford expansive reporting (the exception being the BBC as mentioned, but even they catch plenty of flak from 'concerned taxpayers').

There is definitely no easy solution to the problem, but personally I believe that state-controlled media is a step towards the right direction. Journalism is a necessary service nowadays, so I think a reasonable portion of the budget being dedicated to financing national broadcasters is understandable. The situation will never be ideal, at least in what concerns the foreseeable future, while only extremely prosperous countries will ever be able to achieve the level of reliability of France Télévision or even BBC. On the other hand, public companies are more vulnerable (in a positive sense) to popular scrutiny and often less biased than a private business, whose goal is either profit or the advancement of its owners financial and political interests. The fact that their quality is not excessively influenced by the need to satisfy their shareholders is an extra advantage, which should not be ignored. Mainly due to the prevalent narrative of private enterprises being inherently better than state ones, the fallacy of size and brand-name automatically translating to efficiency and professionalism has evolved into a truly religious dogma. Fortunately, controversies like the Relotius affair may contribute to a fruitful reconsideration of this fragile concept or at least to a necessary improvement of the structure and administration of privately owned newspapers, magazines and etc.

[athanaric]

By the way, Mr Fake News also contributed to the PC refugee narrative:
https://www.zeit.de/gesellschaft/zei...tlinge-zuhause

To their credit, the news magazine hasn't yet taken the article down, rather choosing to amend it with a notice saying that they'll be fact-checking it.