Criticism of the media's review of the government chaos

The strangest thing about the government chaos after the election is not that the parties find it difficult to agree. The strange thing is that a conflict that was openly on the table before the election was not subjected to the merciless scrutiny it deserved.

The Left Party had stated that it did not intend to release a government in which the party itself was not included. At the same time, the Center Party had made it clear that it did not accept the Left Party in the government. Nevertheless, the opposition was treated during large parts of the election campaign as a possible support for the government.

It didn't take a political scientist to spot the problem. Elementary school math was enough.

The media should have done their job harder here. Not by taking a stand for right or left, but by asking the same question over and over again: How is this actually going to happen?

In business, such a plan had never passed the boardroom. No serious business management presents a business plan where two crucial partners announce in advance that their terms are mutually exclusive and then say: We'll work it out afterwards.

A consequence analysis is carried out. The risks are identified. Answers are required before the decision is made.

Politics should not have lower requirements than the business world. And journalism should definitely not set lower demands. Precious time after the election is now spent on sorting out contradictions that the voters should have been properly informed about before election day.

The media's most important task is not to report on the crash afterwards. It is to check the brakes before the car drives off.