The case concerns a program on "Cash TV" by the private TV broadcaster Presse TV. In the run-up to the vote on the adjustment of the minimum conversion rate for pension funds in March 2010, the managing director of a pension fund investment company was interviewed on aspects of pension calculation. Numerous people appealed against the report to the Independent Complaints Authority for Radio and Television (UBI). They criticized the fact that the interviewee had an economic interest in the acceptance of the proposal and was able to present his point of view throughout the entire broadcast.
The UBI came to the conclusion that the broadcast had indeed violated the requirement of fairness. The II. Public Law Division of the Federal Supreme Court has now upheld the appeal lodged against this by Presse TV at its hearing on Friday. In their deliberations, the judges recalled that only SRG, as a public service provider, is committed to the principle of diversity, which also includes diversity of opinion. Private providers, on the other hand, are permitted a certain degree of one-sidedness.
Pure political propaganda not permitted
However, private broadcasters, like SRG, are subject to the principle of objectivity. This does not require all arguments to be comprehensively presented. However, other opinions are important enough to be shown. According to the court, pure political propaganda and manipulative or false reporting would certainly no longer be considered appropriate in this sense. In the specific case, however, the "Cash-TV" broadcast was not objectionable. The counter-arguments were known and had also been raised.
On Friday, the Federal Supreme Court also disagreed with another UBI decision. This case concerned an article in the news magazine "10 vor 10" from 2009, in which the viewer was presented with the thesis that the FDP was closely linked to the pharmaceutical lobby. Among other things, it was stated that three FDP politicians had given parliamentary visitor cards to pharmaceutical companies. The program also featured FDP parliamentarians and the then FDP Federal Councillor Pascal Couchepin, who rejected the theory of links with sometimes harsh words.
The UBI had also considered this report to be a violation of the principle of fairness, but has now also been proven wrong by the Federal Supreme Court following an appeal by the Swiss Broadcasting Corporation SRG. According to the court, viewers were able to form their own opinion. It was clearly evident that the thesis in question was controversial. The facts shown were correct, even if they were hardly meaningful with regard to the topic. (SDA)