Shot across the bow? More like a direct hit

A push message pops up on the cell phone display: "Tourists boarding the first train: Follow the live stream from Zermatt station." If one of Switzerland's top vacation destinations is snowed in, this naturally arouses increased media interest. News can be spread every minute in the alpine country of Switzerland. The price of a helicopter shuttle flight out of "captivity," for example, or even - live! - The price of a helicopter shuttle flight out of "captivity", for example, or even - live! - boarding the train when the reduced avalanche danger allows roads and tracks to be cleared again to and from the Valais mountain village. Of course, said push message from 20Minuten immediately provoked all kinds of gloating comments on the net. True, that the public relevance of the message was questioned. "Journalism, quo vadis?" A sack of rice that has once again fallen over in China has made it into the headlines.

Judging by the current volume in the voting debate, it is not surprising that in the comments on this No News report, a direct reference to the No Billag initiative was also made. The push is "also the most accurate argument" against No Billag, someone interjected. But I am still astonished. About the vehemence of the polemics. The abolition of state radio and television fees demanded by the initiative reveals a belligerence that has rarely been seen before - and not only in the digital anger citizen channels.

"Considerable level of aggression".

A look at the letters to the editor columns of the newspapers is revealing. An opponent of the initiative: "Balanced reporting that highlights different aspects is hardly possible anymore. Radio Berlusconi in Italy sends its regards!" Another thinks that No Billag is more than a small war against SRG: "Cutting three quarters of a company's income in one fell swoop (...) shows a considerable degree of aggression."

But even the proponents argue with the handbrake off. For example, in their assessment of SRF's programming: "If all this didn't come across as so splendidly small-minded, dogmatic, educational, and red-colored, it might still be bearable. (...) Yes, finally abolish the people's indoctrination broadcaster." Or on SRG as a whole: "This juggernaut operation is too reminiscent of the former USSR, where everything was also implemented and monitored by the state."

Too big, too immobile, too complacent

What is the reason for this doggedness? I observe that a considerable amount of frustration has built up toward the SRG with its TV and radio stations. The SRG, which is quasi-governmental due to the obligation to pay fees, is criticized not only unfairly: it is too big, too inflexible, too complacent, and peppered with too many nice-to-have formats. A reform, a healthy downsizing, an open-ended debate about the public service is needed. No wonder so much frustration and anger is now being vented. The Federal Council with Media Minister Doris Leuthard and the SRG management have avoided this necessary debate for years. It is precisely because of this attitude that the SRG is now threatened with being broken up. Fatally, this is a realistic scenario, as the current polls show. Far too many voters now want to "give the SRG a shot across the bow," even though they consider the initiative - quite rightly - too radical and actually worth rejecting in principle.

What really annoys me as an employee of a non-state media company is the seemingly God-given matter-of-factness with which opponents in all forms preach that a Yes to the initiative means the end of independent journalism and the end of journalism itself. A first tidbit, nota bene, from a media professional: "SRG journalists are independent and can also look where others are not allowed or do not want to because of political interests on the carpet.

In politics, too, there is a massive exaggeration, as was evident recently at the delegates' meeting of the FDP Switzerland: If the No Billag initiative is adopted, representatives of French-speaking Switzerland, Ticino and Graubünden urgently warned, there is a threat of a "media desert. SRG as an oasis of journalism? Nonsense. Whether it's private publishers or SRG, which is financed by state fees, we journalists, or rather the editorial teams, still define the limits of independence ourselves. What is still needed is the will to be uncomfortable in the face of authority. And the courage to be at odds with the landscape with a topic or an opinion.

Jérôme Martinu has been editor-in-chief of the Luzerner Zeitung since May 2016. The 43-year-old historian was previously Deputy Editor-in-Chief and Head of Regional Departments since 2012. He has worked at LZ-Medienhaus in Lucerne for over 15 years.

The Luzerner Zeitung and its regional editions in Zug, Nidwalden, Obwalden and Uri are currently read by around 287,000 people. The newspaper is part of the NZZ media group and cooperates in the national section in an institutionalized way with its partner newspaper St. Galler Tagblatt, which is also part of the NZZ.

This column was first published in Werbewoche 2/2018.