Part 4 | My personal criticism of the media

I (and my colleagues in the industry) have noticed that the media are now only tackling the sensitive topic of alcohol with tweezers – or tend to report on it in a one-sided manner. Public broadcasters, in particular, seem to be concerned that they might be accused of trivializing alcohol. However, that's a subjective perception! 😉 At the same time, I expect the media, especially public broadcasters, to make all positions visible and fulfill their journalistic duty of care.

The main thing is no shitstorm

Were you aware that the studies on which the WHO report is based have been criticized? I wasn't aware of that until I started researching it. Although I read every report about it that caught my eye. But of course, it's difficult to write a newspaper article on this topic that people actually want to read. It's a tough subject, I find myself in the same situation.

Clickbaiting at its best - sensationalist titles

In the media, we often read headlines like: "Any amount of alcohol is harmful!" This is a misconception—but it does lead to reading the newspaper articles. The WHO states that any amount of alcohol can be harmful . Or, in the WHO's words: "There is no safe amount of alcohol consumption."

This wording does not mean that even the smallest amounts of alcohol definitely cause harm, but rather that even the smallest amounts of alcohol pose a risk.

Example: If I race down a mountain on a mountain bike, everyone will agree that there's a risk that I could fall on my face and injure myself (minor or serious). We can certainly agree that the risk increases the more often I race down the mountain. Applying this example to the press formulation above, the equivalent would be: "Even the first mountain bike descent leads to an accident." And this formulation is incorrect. The correct formulation would be: "Even the first mountain bike descent is risky and can lead to a (minor or serious) accident."

You can tell I'm a bit at odds with the media.

This is also due to the fact that over the years I've repeatedly come across articles that contain serious technical deficiencies. I'm explicitly not referring to opinions about alcohol consumption, but rather to reports on the production of spirits. The fact that the media is now writing less about spirits has at least the positive side effect of publishing less misinformation about the products.

Just a side example: Many years ago, DIE ZEIT wrote about spirits and incorrectly described the categories "spirit" and "brand." These categories are so fundamentally different! That really made me angry; I'm getting a pulse racing just thinking about it.

live and let live

Part 5 of my blog series is about my very personal perspective on the topic of alcohol consumption. I weigh the benefits and risks (for me!), appeal to common sense, and encourage friendly, respectful interaction.