The general manager's ups and downs

 
Column What does Armin Walpen actually want with his campaign against image censorship by Uefa? Just one week after his strong words, he has already given in meekly. 
He did it effectively, Armin Walpen. Or so it seemed at first. A short interview in the SonntagsZeitung, and the next day many daily newspapers spread the word. Not only in Switzerland. "Swiss broadcasting boss accuses: Uefa manipulates TV images", ran the headline in the Süddeutsche Zeitung, for example. Uefa did not manipulate or censor images, but the TV production company it hired selected and transmitted them. And Swiss television SF simply broadcast the material - as did other television stations - and the SRG Director General announced that he wanted to write a letter to Uefa. Whether he actually did so is not known. In any case, the European football lords will probably have a lot to think about.
However, Walpen's message, which he had disseminated by the SonntagsZeitung, deserves a closer look. "SRG rejects any censorship of sports broadcasts. Large sports associations are increasingly trying to secure control over images and sound with their own production companies. That worries us. Edited images selected by third parties are more than problematic from the point of view of the information mandate and journalistic independence (...)." It is good to hear that SRG rejects the "censorship of sports broadcasts". We took this for granted - and not just for sports broadcasts. Walpen is also right when he mentions the impositions of the sports associations and points out that journalistic work is at risk.
But the Director General is criticizing a situation for which he himself is partly responsible. It has been known since spring 2006 at the latest that Uefa firstly wants to have image sovereignty during the European Football Championship and secondly wants to disseminate "harmonious images". (In this respect, it is only logical that Uefa looks the other way when a streaker or petard is set off by spectators). Nevertheless, SRG agreed to the contract and granted the Uefa organizers image sovereignty for the live stream.
The SRG broadcasters have also allowed Uefa to interfere in the program structure, as the media magazine Klartext wrote back in 2006. In the run-up to the European Football Championship, SRG undertook to broadcast eight magazine reports via Uefa between December 2007 and May 2008. Swiss television also fulfills Uefa's requirements for the Champions League matches by producing a studio show before and after a match.
Speaking of the journalistic independence of SRG sports broadcasts: Peter Sauber is working as a co-commentator ten times this season during the Formula 1 race broadcasts. Where is the journalistic independence in that? Sauber is still part of the BMW Sauber team...
Perhaps Armin Walpen should write a letter to himself and complain to the SRG Director General about the fact that a lobbyist is also allowed to play journalist.
So Armin Walpen has got his knickers in a twist, and it is only logical that a week later he wants to see things completely differently. He recently told Sonntag that the Uefa story was an "isolated incident of minor importance" and that he had voiced his criticism "not least with a view to the Olympic Games in Beijing". And because the matter is important, Walpen wants to be "on site" in the summer and see whether the media can "deal with the doping issue" freely and whether journalists are "generally not hindered in their work". In the event of serious incidents, SRG would have to make "fundamental considerations regarding media coverage", which - as interpreted by Sonntag - could also mean not broadcasting. However, Walpen did not define what exactly constitutes a serious incident.
The real opponent is suddenly far away for the Director General, and so he now wants the public media companies to "discuss in principle" with the sports associations (Uefa, Fifa, IOC) and "agree on certain framework conditions if necessary". What was previously regulated in individual cases is now to be regulated in general.
According to Walpen, the production of images by the organizers is probably economically painful, but "less problematic and acceptable". The important thing is that the choice of images lies with the media. In plain language: it is enough for him that the media can choose from the organizer images. But editorial independence looks different. One week after Walpen's strong words, the SRG Director General meekly conceded.
Hans Stutz is a freelance journalist