Everyone against Blocher?
Posted: Tue Feb 04, 2025 5:49 am
Many television viewers were surprised that a serious error had been made in the selection of the panellists in the “Arena” (25 years after the EEA vote against) and that the principle of balance had been blatantly violated in the selection of the participants.
Anyone who looks at the latest "Arena" will america rcs data actually see that three of the four actors opposed Blocher: Franz Steinegger (former National Council member and former FDP president), Elisabeth Schneider-Schneiter (National Council member CVP, BL) and Daniel Jositsch (Council of States SP, ZH). The expert Christa Tobler, professor of European law at the University of Basel, behaved neutrally and objectively. The selection of the two public actors was balanced. The accusation of imbalance is therefore understandable. The "Tages-Anzeiger" also wrote: "Everyone against Blocher: The fact check on the EU "Arena".
Consumers' frustration is understandable. However, critics are not aware that the balance between the pros and cons only applies to a "voting arena". In the normal "arena", the image of the current party landscape applies. This is usually not balanced in terms of attitudes. When it comes to the procurement of fighter jets, for example, Glättli argues alone against everyone else. All parties were also deliberately invited to the EU "arena". The image corresponds to the image of the current party landscape. Incidentally, 25 years ago Blocher also fought alone against all parties - and won.
If the ombudsman's office later has to deal with the allegedly unbalanced "Arena" broadcast, Jonas Projer has nothing to fear. He also clearly gave Blocher more speaking time.
Anyone who looks at the latest "Arena" will america rcs data actually see that three of the four actors opposed Blocher: Franz Steinegger (former National Council member and former FDP president), Elisabeth Schneider-Schneiter (National Council member CVP, BL) and Daniel Jositsch (Council of States SP, ZH). The expert Christa Tobler, professor of European law at the University of Basel, behaved neutrally and objectively. The selection of the two public actors was balanced. The accusation of imbalance is therefore understandable. The "Tages-Anzeiger" also wrote: "Everyone against Blocher: The fact check on the EU "Arena".
Consumers' frustration is understandable. However, critics are not aware that the balance between the pros and cons only applies to a "voting arena". In the normal "arena", the image of the current party landscape applies. This is usually not balanced in terms of attitudes. When it comes to the procurement of fighter jets, for example, Glättli argues alone against everyone else. All parties were also deliberately invited to the EU "arena". The image corresponds to the image of the current party landscape. Incidentally, 25 years ago Blocher also fought alone against all parties - and won.
If the ombudsman's office later has to deal with the allegedly unbalanced "Arena" broadcast, Jonas Projer has nothing to fear. He also clearly gave Blocher more speaking time.