There are plenty of experts and analysts. been the focus of attention on this day? I have dealt with influence phenomena for years. I have seen how supposedly neutral organizers were able to influence events and broadcasts,without the conscious control being recognized.
The manipulation was carried out only through the selection of speakers and the choice of topics. Assuming that the organizer's heart beats on the opposing side, he could deliberately hire a switzerland rcs data popular, eloquent speaker on "his" opposing side. On the pro-supporting side, however, the biased organizer could hire an unpopular person who also expresses himself in a complicated way. With this subtle manipulation or one-sidedness, no institution can prove that he was one-sided, even though the organizer deliberately and consciously controlled things. To the outside, everything is correct.
Each side gets to speak. The speaking time could also be divided up precisely. It remains impossible to design every program in a completely neutral way. Ultimately, the mindset of the makers always decides. Whoever can do something basically has POWER. As an opponent of any kind of muzzle policy, I would therefore put a lot of trust in the program makers and keep them on a long leash. However, I think it is important to have a diversity of mindsets in all work teams.