Louana Coconut Oil For Black Hair

data-driven policy journalism remedy for" quiet death of the professional politicians "?

a critical objection to the Politics and journalism produced a significant case for new ways, the long-standing Handelsblatt -parliamentary correspondent Maximilian Steinbeis at Carta and in the journal policy and communications formulated.

The article "The Story make visible " he deals with the desire of political journalists to turn everything "a story", before all, a drama personalities.

Wohlfeil criticism, we know. But he is also a alternative, however: political journalism that works more like good journalism, which figures, data, facts vorknöpft, Expertise for the public makes it accessible and understandable.

Who wants to make politics accessible to the public and not by storytelling hammer out who has come to explore other possibilities. Steinbeis trend points to the "data journalism", providing access to vast amounts of data through visualization and navigation aids.

A good introduction to the "Data journalism" offered by the British Guardian who wants to distinguish itself with it.

• " How to be a data journalist. " The coach and author Paul Bradshaw explains how to find data and visualized.
• editor Simon Rogers the appropriate editorial work explains the example of Afghanistan at the Guardian papers of Wikileaks.
• The Nieman Journalism Lab at the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University, he does so well in the video: " How The Guardian is pioneering data journalism with free tools "

Not only Wikileaks-war reports from Afghanistan were suitable for "data journalism," said Steinbeis. Also, for example, the Hartz-IV-debate is different than previously represented. Just because something is not ". Sure, the data are not clean tabellierbar and difficult to process automatically, but the more it would do for seasoned political journalists ." Steinbeis concludes:

The new political journalism is not linear, and it is visual. He provides the reader with navigation, so that they find in the jungle of political solutions to their own point of view and mark up. He mapped the landscape of political opinion. It is useful. It is needed. It is relevant. And it is exciting to boot.

Steinbeis advertise here with the term visualization of course, not only for traditional information graphics, but for the company started in 2008 project Policy Atlas - Policy Mapping controversies ". With the help of the Vodafone Foundation, his team is currently concentrating on interactive visualization of school policy in Germany.

Steinbeis has, moreover, by no means a problem with storytelling per se, he has been so prominent as a writer. On the other hand, from Steinbeis house lawyer. How is law, journalism and narrative poetry tolerated, can be seen in his book "The Germans and the Basic Law. History and limits of our Constitution " rate. Read value is always be Constitution blog.

Whether one with Steinbeis Policy Atlas his "new visual forms of political debates for the journalistic high office of the future holds or not, the current plea in the article" The Story visible "at least put his finger on the right problems. And visualization is just one of many aspects.

frustration in political journalism

Steinbeis writes about the frustration of political reporting:

Policy We journalists are accustomed to regard it as a problem of politics if they "no history": What can we help it if are such bores in Brussels? If only negotiate the compromise, rather than the decision on a clean either-or sharpen a For this-or-other hand, can create tension with the efficient one? How to tell a story without tension? Then they are just not available in the newspaper , we used to say. Is not our problem

The trouble is. This beautiful tapered either-or situation, we need so necessary for our job, there are increasingly rare in politics. not only in Brussels, also in Berlin: Between two to three coalition partners, five parties, sixteen countries and a thousand associations, experts and stakeholders Berlin is already negotiated and consulted as much as in Brussels. (...)

us is our subject, the politics, lost. And unfortunately that is definitely our problem. For a while we thought we would get away with, that we "personalize", then look for the drama in the acting characters. This can make it. But not if it is the acting figure, say, Ronald Pofalla is.

This leads then, Steinbeis, to cynical-sarcastic tone of the media ("all idiots in Berlin"). And to that the excitement journalists simply do it yourself :

We brush on riot and make every disagreement a huge noise and from any dispute about the right way in the Hartz IV reform a "mutiny against von der Leyen and fail to cover both the subject and the reader interest : As if the interest outside the capital haze anyone would be boring if any politician has trouble with any other boring politicians.

to give the readers the debt is not useful. These were not so indifferent, and with politics, as journalists think they are just the "ticket conflicts and absurdities " tired.

Data journalism Investigative Journalism

The front is all, journalists should Facts and Figures interpret and evaluate. journalists should not only individuals and their family feuds deal, but with documents, records, statistics, budgets. Because there are to review the policy decisions. At least if one knows the players and their interests behind it. Those who neglect this and does not want to investigate, can sleep real journalism.

• An insight that is not new. Then yes there are also initiatives such as network search . NO complains that journalism increasingly for comment marketing " depraved. "Research is there s quality hinge for a solid journalism background. Without critical analysis and uncomfortable truths stifled democracy in general and approximate . "NR is for the" thriving public relations industry "as well as the blame as the economic priorities of broadcasters and publishers, the isolation researcher and journalist as well as the" information-blockers "in institutions and companies.

Too many journalists have forgotten, on the" search for paper trail. Because they have never seen in a budget to review the budget heading. The no parliamentary protocols browse or legislative texts with speakers designs or position papers comparison of associations. Less public papers never mind.

Even if they find the papers, they can not read and understand. The them is either too cumbersome, or they have been trained to never.

course hang together paper and people. research experience shows that paper out to people and lead people to paper. You have to track down people to help interpret the texts and data. Conversely, every interview or background conversation is better if the journalist has previously researched and the text and data knows and understands.

Steinbeis's article is therefore also a plea for Investigative Journalism to understand, even if he is so friendly with its arguments as a network search. It is obvious that you need for Investigative Journalism certain skills and the right front of thematic specialization, depth instead of breadth, not fear.

In other words, is it a matter of political journalism , in which the property is in the foreground. Journalisme times, in many categories - from specialists in great editors to the popular TV magazine, the industry trade press to the Internet portal for experts or scientists.

In some "professional journalism", it is also primarily about personalities, such as sports and culture, sometimes called economic (what with whom managers ...). In others, the personalities are more likely to be neglected.

But a reporter at the Federal Constitutional Court is to tell a story about which judges have to pick with what lawyer a chicken - unless it's really important. In the current egg-dioxin scandal, it does not need a "story" a drama about the personal animosity between the manager of a feed company and its supplier.

is Now a Karlsruhe ruling or a tangible poison scandal still a good current hanger, the drama is built. But what if it does not exist? Here again journalists find an answer.

A medical journalist, an environmental journalist, a consumer journalist, a Technikjounalist, a science journalist is relatively little care about personalities. A little "human touch" and "human interest" is OK, but that is in most cases simply a stylistic device, and certainly not the story.

Such journalists are only successful if they can prepare expertise for a wide audience and stay on task, which means in most cases: hard data and facts. Plus links. The hidden, you have to find.

Who as a trade journalist for politics understand, the actors never lose sight of the clear. He or she cares but the relationships political decisions, institutions, structures, processes and interests . Does it have to be boring and abstract? No, but it is more difficult, strenuous, arduous journalism.

course, is what politics always about who wins and loses. But politics does journalism as a completely entertaining sports coverage too short

Such invites only more superficial staging and Spindoctoring a -. Instead of serious debate. To these politicians try so well. In today's media landscape, it is understandable that they want to keep media and non-policy-politics apart as possible. For democracy, for society and the economy, however, is not good.

"We win our subject, the politics are lost," says Steinbeis. Indeed. How and why political decisions are made, and what they mean, which is depicted in the media less and less. politicians, officials and lobbyists know the way very well, so they often prefer to work behind closed doors so that the media circus remains outside.

generalists and specialists

are in politics it, as in the media, politicians, generalists and specialists. The generalists are responsible for the strategic leadership for moderation, for the management and just for the show. You have a career. The trade politicians, if they are good, even appreciated, but are there limits to their careers, if so name recognition, popularity and the highest offices of state are meant. high professional influence on money and laws is often where the cameras and microphones are not.

• The example cited by Steinbeis Brussels is very apt. Brussels correspondent to be had, for the young Steinbeis . A dream - not for most of his colleagues so it is also among politicians: Who great influence onto actual law-making will have is often better off than in the European Parliament as a backbencher in parliament.
• The price is usually zero publicity and media attention, which then leads to subordination in his own party. This can be a career killer.
• have Conversely Bundestag much better access to the media -. But the reverse is the professional influence in many (not all) policies tend to be less
• One consequence is that federal politicians in doubt, choose to primarily as "manager" of their constituencies to secure profile. Those who do not quite forward can play in the national media circus, it must be at least in the province of the king.
• for the executive branch is the relatively comfortable, and for the Parliament altogether bad.

having to choose between influence and popularity, is for politicians actually madly. The one with the other should go hand in hand. Do it but not often. The result is possibly what the called Wiener Zeitung some time ago the "silent death of the professional politicians "

Once upon a time there was the institution, "Federal necessity": This was from the party leadership by experts based on the ranking list of selectable locations. Today, however, is with knowledge and expertise have long been no mandate to make more , there are other qualities. Whether it is the better in terms of quality of our people's representatives, may be doubted. What remains of the House, if it still is good neither to the political stage as a working parliament?

Good question. One that must face not just party leaders but also political journalists. There is no doubt the media make the career and work opportunities for skilled politician. The less Journalists look into the matter, the less the politicians take care of the matter.

It sounds ludicrous, but also the reality of the symbiosis between politics and political journalism. The formula is simple:

• journalists with expertise primarily work with politicians with expertise.
• journalists without expertise to work primarily with politicians without expert knowledge.

their preferred partner to the information they provide channels of communication possibilities, status and importance.

If we get the journalists and politicians lost with the technical depth means of course not the end of expertise. Which is in a highly complex world and more important.

one must then only be surprised if there is a expertocracy only of officials, lobbyists, consultants, think tanks and outgesourceten faceless professional circles, in which the political control (and co) is small by parliaments and the public.

That can be the citizens and interest groups like permanent, do not expect, however. And for some media and some journalists, the Max Steinbeis' philosophy is just that a chance. Not least via the Internet and grassroots campaigns.

The opportunity also lobbies (whether business or NGOs), reflecting the professional discourse in the public and create pressure that can be plenty uncomfortable for the show-oriented all-round journalists and politicians.