Mr. Lochthofen, the program “Land under pressure – 50 voices from the people,” which ran at the beginning of this week, attracted great audience interest on the first and MDR. How did the idea for this documentary, in which around 50 people, mostly involved in local communities, have their say, come about?
After the federal election, the producers approached the editors-in-chief of MDR, RBB and NDR with this special idea ahead of three important state elections. They didn't just want to problematize from a top view, but also wanted to show a large number of elected officials such as mayors or district administrators, but also the local people who authentically describe their everyday lives and share their view of the present. They also say what stresses them, how they cope with many shortcomings and how they find solutions.
See F.A.Z. articles more often in your search results
F.A.Z. prefer on Google
Was this documentation an exception to the MDR's offering?
No. This is not unusual for us. The MDR regularly strives to portray people in their lives and let them have their say. This documentation is part of a series of reports in which we repeatedly take the time to show different perspectives. Take our series “Anger” or “Everything for the Future” from our business editorial team. Here people report about what moves them, about their personal environment, and of course they also represent very different and controversial opinions. We want to make this experience and these experiences visible. That's what we're here for.
The MDR is currently reporting from and about Saxony-Anhalt more frequently than it did months ago. Do you want to convince your audience not to vote for the AfD?
The MDR reports around the clock and every day from Saxony-Anhalt, Saxony and Thuringia. That's why we exist. But of course the reports from a federal state that is also facing important national elections receive special attention. Regardless, state elections are high mass for regional media, and this includes extensive reporting. In our election concepts, which we publish for all elections, you can read in detail how and how much we report. But we are not campaigning. We try to give people a comprehensive picture of what they should know to make a decision.
What do you think viewers and listeners expect from MDR today in terms of information?
Regional reporting is the basis for our success. And we understand regionality as a broad range from current affairs to culture to entertainment. We try every day to include the lives of people from our three countries in our program, with all their differences and similarities, and thus to create a concrete benefit for the broadcasting fee. We are pretty close to our audience with our regional studios and our sometimes very regional programs on traditional television and radio. In addition to pure information, we are also always concerned with creating a certain sense of calm and identity in a time that is not entirely easy.
There is also criticism of the reporting by public broadcasters in Saxony-Anhalt. At least a study commission was set up by parliament. How is the acceptance of MDR's regional offerings?
I think it is important and legitimate that a state parliament, which also decides on the broadcasting fee, deals thoroughly with the structure and program of public broadcasting. Apart from that, today we see that almost every institution in our country is criticized and has to face harsh public criticism. This is a sign of our times and is bearable. We have been in direct contact with our audience very regularly in various formats for years and listen to what bothers people and what they expect. The numbers show that we are successful: the linear MDR TV program has the largest market share of all third-party programs, and the radio programs and online offerings are also used intensively. In addition, 73 percent of people in Central Germany tell us that they trust the MDR.
It sounds as if – even though the AfD wants to terminate the MDR state treaty – everything is fine.
No, no one drives on autopilot here. We deal with the response to our program almost every day, including bad decisions and mistakes. We are aware of the criticism of public broadcasting, but we also note the praise and approval. Based on our experience, many conversations with citizens and also on the basis of well-founded surveys, we know that there is no majority in our broadcasting area that would like to abolish the MDR.
The MDR has to save money, programs have been canceled, “Tatort” and “Polizeiruf 110” have been suspended for three years. What content priorities do you set at the station?
In the last few weeks we have had to make very painful savings decisions and forego important productions because we are missing a large share of the financing due to the contribution adjustment that was proposed by the KEF Fees Commission but failed to materialize. The MDR is a slim institution and doesn't have deep pockets to ride this out. Because our priority - especially in an election year - is regional reporting, we have deliberately excluded our regional political reporting, culture, business and regional entertainment from savings. We must not “wobble” here and must be reliably present in a broadcast area because, apart from us and the remaining regional newspapers, there is no one else who can provide this breadth of information.
You can also bring this topic relevance to ARD through the first.
We do that every day. We create visibility for the topics here in the first. But the prerequisite for this is that we are strong across the board. Without our regional presence, the voice of the people would be missing from the national discourse or would only take place on a very superficial level. Nobody but us has a reason to unpack a camera outside of election campaigns in the Altmark.
The State Media Treaty calls for more regional offerings. As is well known, the number of residents in Central Germany continues to decline and with it the number of contributors. How can this contradiction be resolved?
We have an obligation to work efficiently. This includes consistently using the opportunities offered by technological innovations. This is the only way we can create a relevant, interesting program despite a decreasing number of contributors. This also includes a contemporary organization. In addition, the ARD is also a community of solidarity in which we produce together and create balance where necessary to ensure the ability to act together in the coming years. Precisely because ARD's regional information services are so important and cannot be produced by the market, we must organize efficiency together and work in a division of labor - this is how the contradiction can be resolved.
One often hears and reads that the media is partly responsible for the AfD's current popularity in both East and West. Do you think that's true? Does the MDR also have to exercise self-criticism in this regard?
Of course, we have to ask ourselves every day how well we are managing to answer people's questions and whether we have their important issues covered. But to place genuine responsibility for the success of the AfD on the MDR or the media would be massively under-complex. We know what leads to certain voting decisions and also where the success of populist theses comes from. The decisive factors are the years of economic crisis and the perception of dysfunction in certain areas of the state in which the population expects politicians to control it. I expect the MDR to reflect these expectations and dissatisfaction. In the documentary “Country under pressure – 50 voices from the people” you can see how frustration is building up and yet many people are still trying to find a solution. Anyone who tries to blame the media or the East for the AfD's success has understood nothing.
