In vain one searches in the ZDF television council for a representative of the interests of the largest minority in Germany: i.e. Turkish society. Instead, the PKK sympathizer Ali Ertan Toprak is given privileged treatment.
With the reporting of the mainstream media about the citizens living in Germany with special reference to Turkey, a one-dimensional perspective has been emerging for at least a decade. The contributions are characterized by the pretense of false facts, manipulation – and partly cynicism. In order to take into account the background of political motivation in this theatricality, it makes sense to take a look at the decision-making bodies at the public media institutions.
The ZDF Television Council is a body which is elected every four years and should actually be composed of representatives of socially relevant groups. According to the ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court, it should reflect the diversity of society in Germany. Its area of responsibility includes monitoring the principles of the Interstate Broadcasting Treaty and the election of the Director-General: which is the most important personnel decision at ZDF.
Toprak – a face with many facets
Ali Ertan Toprak has for many years held the chairmanship of the Kurdish Community in Germany (KGD), which is perceived as the extended arm and mouthpiece of the terrorist organization PKK, which is banned in Germany. He has also been a member of the ZDF Television Council since 2016 and, as chairman of the Federal Working Group of Immigrant Associations (BAGIV), formally represents the interests of citizens with a migration background in Germany. Although in terms of numbers this working group represents only a small proportion of citizens with cultural diversity, it is nevertheless given privileged treatment in the nomination for the ZDF Television Council for the area of ‘Migrants’.
Toprak’s ideas about the representation of the interests of migrants, however, sometimes take on bizarre forms and impressively demonstrate his excessive demands with this responsible task. Instead of acting dutifully as an advocate for migrants, he publicly expresses sympathy for terrorist organizations and does not publicly distance himself from terrorism: from the abduction and forced recruitment of children for the armed struggle, from the expulsion of civilians, from rape or sexual exploitation by the PKK.
The consequences of the scandalous occupation of the Television Council
An undogmatic occupation of a position in the Television Council should, according to the ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court, be a reflection of our society. Therefore, all relevant social groups should find their place in the Council, not least to ensure the credibility and acceptance of the Council in society. In vain, however, one looks in vain for a representative of the interests of the largest minority in Germany in the Television Council: i.e. Turkish society. It is therefore not surprising that the evening talk shows feature instrumentalized personalities who unjustifiably presume to speak for Turkish or Islamic society – without ever having received the corresponding legitimation from this group of people.
However, since it is not competence and a legitimate right to represent the “migrants” sector that are at the forefront of the occupation of the position in the Television Council, but rather the party book and political worldview, the occupation by Toprak degenerates into a farce. It does not receive sufficient support from the majority of citizens with a migration background in Germany.
Would the nomination of a Daesh sympathizer be possible?
For the uninvolved citizen, the question also arises as to why politicians who show no interest in children’s and women’s rights and do not work for peace and prosperity are expected to provide such a platform and thus assume such an important responsibility. Imagine a sympathizer of a terrorist organization other than the PKK sitting on the television council. Could one imagine, for example, a supporter of the terrorist organization Daesh in the TV Council? The PKK, which is now responsible for more than 40,000 victims, and the murderous Daesh terrorist militia, which subjects holy Islam to its own ideas, obviously set different standards for the media.
Good terrorists versus evil terrorists
When looking at the definition of terrorism in Germany, it is immediately apparent that a distinction between good and evil terrorists is perpetual. It is this cynical double standard that contributes to the polarization of our society and further deepens the social distortions. Moreover, it remains a mystery to the public why those responsible in politics and the media cannot realistically assess the consequences of their decisions and thus put social cohesion in Germany to a hard test.
Only people of integrity who seriously and without hypocrisy work for peace and the future of our society should be allowed to take up a position in the Television Council. I think we owe this to our children and to future generations!
Opinion contributions reflect the views of the respective author and not those of the editorial staff. For inquiries you use yourselves please: [email protected]