ussian president Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has had wide ranging impacts, not only causing devastation within Ukraine but also impacting the political and economic landscape of Europe, and, to a lesser extent, the world. As the coldest part of winter nears, Western countries are scrambling to compensate for resources that are unprotected amid the conflict, in order to heat European homes. This anxiety is reflected in German media coverage of the war. While German mass media has generally covered the war in a manner that is sympathetic to Ukraine, tonality changes when considering the economic impacts of the war.
DisinfoLab, a student-led think tank at the College of William & Mary, analyzed three German news media outlets since the initial Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022. DisinfoLab found that while each reported with slightly different sentimentalities on the war, all three exhibited notable shifts during times of international economic crises.
To conduct this research, DisinfoLab collected articles from three major German media outlets reporting on the Russia-Ukraine war. These are daily German tabloid newspaper Bild, daily online newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ), and daily online newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung. Bild is a tabloid-style newspaper similar to the well-known English language UK-based tabloid The Sun. FAZ and Süddeutsche Zeitung are center-right and center-left publications, respectively. DisinfoLab examined the most frequently paired words in articles from each outlet to evaluate the article’s sentiment. Overall, German news sources reported differently when the economy was exposed to insecurity, suggesting economic impacts were of particular concern to media audiences.
German Media Mixes Objectivity, Sentimentality
Across all three outlets, the sentiments have been pro-Ukraine. They used language that, while was often objective, encouraged sympathy for Ukraine and highlighted the brutality of the Russian government and forces. In each case, however, these sentiments shifted when tackling economic issues, likely because these are the issues that materially impact German life.
Bild
The first German media outlet DisinfoLab analyzed was Bild. From the invasion on, Bild writers had a definitively pro-Ukraine sentiment. However, their language remained relatively objective, with frequently collocated word pairs including: [‘embattled,’ ‘cities’], [‘military,’ ‘conflicts’], and [‘attacks,’ ‘east’]. These words do not show strong bias in favor of Russia or Ukraine. This shifted in their articles covering the July 23 missile strike on the Ukrainian port of Odessa. This missile strike, which broke amnesty agreements between Russia and Ukraine for securing grain exports and energy supplies to the rest of the world, marked a turning point in the conflict in German media.
An article on July 23 included [‘dictator,’ ‘vladimir’], which was frequently used with the phrases “cowardly attack” (in reference to Putin’s missile strike on the Odessa port) and “Putin barbarism.” Bild has never strayed from their pro-Ukraine perspective, but this article is far more biased and critical of Russian forces. Thus, this outlet’s reporting reflects how public opinion can shift towards negative biases when a country is facing economic insecurity.
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung
DisinfoLab found the reporting of breaking news site Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) to also be objective in its reporting of Russia’s war on Ukraine before Russia’s strike on Odessa. One article, published February 24, set a very objective standard toward Russia: this article used the word “war” just as many times as “special operation,” (Putin’s preferred description of his invasion into Ukraine). “Special operation” was used in phrases mentioning peace negotiations or in context of Putin’s words on the matter of the invasion. This suggests that FAZ hopes to promote German neutrality, by not favoring NATO’s or Russia’s preferred language. In an article written in April following the discovery of war crimes in Bucha, the following collocated words were among the most frequently used: [‘air,’ assault’], [‘traces,’ ‘torture’], and [‘territorial,’ ‘defense’]. FAZ reported a view that was critical of the war crimes, but still largely reported the facts intentionally and objectively.
In FAZ’s two articles published on July 23 after the missile strike on Odessa, journalists ceased using the term “special operation” altogether. Instead, the military conflict is only referred to as a “war,” signaling a dismissal of the Russian perspective. The word “war” is used in concordance with the following: “harvest,” “dire consequences,” “europe nutrition,” “winter,” and “total exports,” displaying concern towards the war’s interference in food trade. This reiterates the tendency of German media to report differently when access to energy and food is put at risk by international conflict.
Süddeutsche Zeitung
The third German media outlet, Süddeutsche Zeitung, exhibited the starkest linguistic contrast between topics. In an article from February 24, frequently collocated words included [‘out of control,’ ‘dictator’], [‘nuclear,’ ‘weapons’], [‘battered,’ ‘europe’], and [‘war,’ ‘aggression’]. In a Süddeutsche Zeitung article from April about the discovery of war crimes in Bucha, words frequently in concordance included “Russian troops committed atrocities.” However, this stance shifts as questions of resources emerge with Russia’s missile strike on the port city of Odessa.
Süddeutsche Zeitung’s article July 23 reports dissimilarly to their previous articles. Despite Russia having broken international law and further blurring the lines of military war, the article uses the phrase “the question now” before referring to the export of grains. This suggests that the principal concern of this German media outlet regarding the war is the country’s access to vital resources. Among the most common words in concordance are “agreement” with “Kiev export grain” and “grain agreement signed.” The article makes no mention of civilian casualties. This dismissal reveals this outlet’s desire to maintain neutrality in hopes of preventing further issues. This change in perspective, though manifesting differently in this outlet from Bild or FAZ, still reveals the changing nature of German public opinion when access to resources is threatened.
Domestic Stressors and Media Sentimentality
Domestic stressors, such as access to grain, affect how German media portrays Russia’s war on Ukraine. This assertion, supported through a linguistic analysis of three German media outlets on various dates and topics, reveals German tendencies to influence public opinion based on economic security. The general German consensus on Russia’s war on Ukraine seems to stem more from their recent exposure to trade insecurity than from concerns about international law and human rights.
Germany faces diplomatic pressures from NATO and the EU to encourage public opinion to favor Ukrainian sentiments, as evidenced in the initial articles regarding the invasion. However, the articles analyzed from times when Germany faced economic insecurity reveals the true motive of these influences to be economic preservation, rather than genuine opposition to the Kremlin’s actions. The linguistic shift was intentional and calculated, unveiling that Germany will remain critical of Putin’s actions until their own security is at risk.
a global affairs media network
Evaluating German Media’s Coverage of the Russia-Ukraine War
Photo by Christian Lue via Unsplash.
January 13, 2023
The student-led think tank DisinfoLab analyzed three German news outlets since the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022. While German mass media has generally covered the war in a manner that is sympathetic to Ukraine, tonality changed when considering the economic impacts of the war.
R
ussian president Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine has had wide ranging impacts, not only causing devastation within Ukraine but also impacting the political and economic landscape of Europe, and, to a lesser extent, the world. As the coldest part of winter nears, Western countries are scrambling to compensate for resources that are unprotected amid the conflict, in order to heat European homes. This anxiety is reflected in German media coverage of the war. While German mass media has generally covered the war in a manner that is sympathetic to Ukraine, tonality changes when considering the economic impacts of the war.
DisinfoLab, a student-led think tank at the College of William & Mary, analyzed three German news media outlets since the initial Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022. DisinfoLab found that while each reported with slightly different sentimentalities on the war, all three exhibited notable shifts during times of international economic crises.
To conduct this research, DisinfoLab collected articles from three major German media outlets reporting on the Russia-Ukraine war. These are daily German tabloid newspaper Bild, daily online newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ), and daily online newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung. Bild is a tabloid-style newspaper similar to the well-known English language UK-based tabloid The Sun. FAZ and Süddeutsche Zeitung are center-right and center-left publications, respectively. DisinfoLab examined the most frequently paired words in articles from each outlet to evaluate the article’s sentiment. Overall, German news sources reported differently when the economy was exposed to insecurity, suggesting economic impacts were of particular concern to media audiences.
German Media Mixes Objectivity, Sentimentality
Across all three outlets, the sentiments have been pro-Ukraine. They used language that, while was often objective, encouraged sympathy for Ukraine and highlighted the brutality of the Russian government and forces. In each case, however, these sentiments shifted when tackling economic issues, likely because these are the issues that materially impact German life.
Bild
The first German media outlet DisinfoLab analyzed was Bild. From the invasion on, Bild writers had a definitively pro-Ukraine sentiment. However, their language remained relatively objective, with frequently collocated word pairs including: [‘embattled,’ ‘cities’], [‘military,’ ‘conflicts’], and [‘attacks,’ ‘east’]. These words do not show strong bias in favor of Russia or Ukraine. This shifted in their articles covering the July 23 missile strike on the Ukrainian port of Odessa. This missile strike, which broke amnesty agreements between Russia and Ukraine for securing grain exports and energy supplies to the rest of the world, marked a turning point in the conflict in German media.
An article on July 23 included [‘dictator,’ ‘vladimir’], which was frequently used with the phrases “cowardly attack” (in reference to Putin’s missile strike on the Odessa port) and “Putin barbarism.” Bild has never strayed from their pro-Ukraine perspective, but this article is far more biased and critical of Russian forces. Thus, this outlet’s reporting reflects how public opinion can shift towards negative biases when a country is facing economic insecurity.
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung
DisinfoLab found the reporting of breaking news site Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) to also be objective in its reporting of Russia’s war on Ukraine before Russia’s strike on Odessa. One article, published February 24, set a very objective standard toward Russia: this article used the word “war” just as many times as “special operation,” (Putin’s preferred description of his invasion into Ukraine). “Special operation” was used in phrases mentioning peace negotiations or in context of Putin’s words on the matter of the invasion. This suggests that FAZ hopes to promote German neutrality, by not favoring NATO’s or Russia’s preferred language. In an article written in April following the discovery of war crimes in Bucha, the following collocated words were among the most frequently used: [‘air,’ assault’], [‘traces,’ ‘torture’], and [‘territorial,’ ‘defense’]. FAZ reported a view that was critical of the war crimes, but still largely reported the facts intentionally and objectively.
In FAZ’s two articles published on July 23 after the missile strike on Odessa, journalists ceased using the term “special operation” altogether. Instead, the military conflict is only referred to as a “war,” signaling a dismissal of the Russian perspective. The word “war” is used in concordance with the following: “harvest,” “dire consequences,” “europe nutrition,” “winter,” and “total exports,” displaying concern towards the war’s interference in food trade. This reiterates the tendency of German media to report differently when access to energy and food is put at risk by international conflict.
Süddeutsche Zeitung
The third German media outlet, Süddeutsche Zeitung, exhibited the starkest linguistic contrast between topics. In an article from February 24, frequently collocated words included [‘out of control,’ ‘dictator’], [‘nuclear,’ ‘weapons’], [‘battered,’ ‘europe’], and [‘war,’ ‘aggression’]. In a Süddeutsche Zeitung article from April about the discovery of war crimes in Bucha, words frequently in concordance included “Russian troops committed atrocities.” However, this stance shifts as questions of resources emerge with Russia’s missile strike on the port city of Odessa.
Süddeutsche Zeitung’s article July 23 reports dissimilarly to their previous articles. Despite Russia having broken international law and further blurring the lines of military war, the article uses the phrase “the question now” before referring to the export of grains. This suggests that the principal concern of this German media outlet regarding the war is the country’s access to vital resources. Among the most common words in concordance are “agreement” with “Kiev export grain” and “grain agreement signed.” The article makes no mention of civilian casualties. This dismissal reveals this outlet’s desire to maintain neutrality in hopes of preventing further issues. This change in perspective, though manifesting differently in this outlet from Bild or FAZ, still reveals the changing nature of German public opinion when access to resources is threatened.
Domestic Stressors and Media Sentimentality
Domestic stressors, such as access to grain, affect how German media portrays Russia’s war on Ukraine. This assertion, supported through a linguistic analysis of three German media outlets on various dates and topics, reveals German tendencies to influence public opinion based on economic security. The general German consensus on Russia’s war on Ukraine seems to stem more from their recent exposure to trade insecurity than from concerns about international law and human rights.
Germany faces diplomatic pressures from NATO and the EU to encourage public opinion to favor Ukrainian sentiments, as evidenced in the initial articles regarding the invasion. However, the articles analyzed from times when Germany faced economic insecurity reveals the true motive of these influences to be economic preservation, rather than genuine opposition to the Kremlin’s actions. The linguistic shift was intentional and calculated, unveiling that Germany will remain critical of Putin’s actions until their own security is at risk.
