[…] I am firmly convinced that the common European values can only be represented with passion in the global dialogue of cultures and religions if we learn to articulate them again to some extent.

This is an exciting contribution by the media to an outstanding discussion. Because in today’s fast-moving world, the vibrancy of history leaves a lot to be desired, or at least it is not common property to the extent that I think it should be.

When we talk about dialogue between cultures, it must be conducted with respect and tolerance for other cultures. But we very quickly come to the conclusion that tolerance cannot be applied to everything, but that in our view – at least in mine – there are certain values, such as the dignity of the individual, that are not negotiable. This must surely be the first step in such a dialogue.

The dignity of the human being, of each individual human being, is the crystallisation point of our self-understanding, and it is also the basis for the fact that we have something like freedom of opinion and freedom of the press. Our commitment to human dignity also feeds our commitment to freedom of expression and freedom of the press.

The dissemination of information and access to all information is an important defence against the oppression or harassment of individuals. When I look at the Prime Minister of Brandenburg, perhaps others in this room and myself, we also lived for 35 years in the former GDR with the media taking an interest in the lives of people who were unable to enjoy the blessings of freedom of the press. And when I think today how many people live under oppression and harassment, it is a permanent challenge for the media to make these fates visible and to draw our attention to them.

At the same time, in a democracy, it is important to provide the public with information about structures that may have a tendency to lack transparency, where people act self-righteously, beyond their own capabilities and competences. In other words, the transparency that the media bring to our society is always a driving force behind the renewal of democratic structures.

On the other hand, the commitment to the dignity of each individual is also something that limits the possibilities of the media. This limitation needs to be discussed: Where is the protection and dignity of the individual at risk when the media have a claim on everything? In this sense, questions have been asked repeatedly in recent weeks, months and certainly years. Where are the media challenged? Where are its limits revealed?

[…] So we are called upon, and the media are called upon. They have a special role to play in this context. I would like to see a very intensive discussion between media representatives about how to look back on the so-called cartoon controversy. I believe that this so-called cartoon controversy illustrates some of the tensions between the freedom of the media, the duty to report, including the possibility of exaggeration, and at the same time respect and tolerance for other cultures.

I predict that the completely new possibilities of communication technologies will force all of us in the European Union and around the world to learn how to deal with them. Today they allow almost simultaneous exchanges through newspapers in Europe, the Middle East and other parts of the world. This means that what is written in our country is immediately available in a completely different cultural area and is received there in a completely new way.

The question is: can it simply be explained by the freedom of the press that you only focus on your local audience and write for them, but ignore the effects elsewhere in the world with completely different reception possibilities and say: ‘That’s none of my business, I’m a German newspaper, I write for Germany’, or does this globalisation of information also have to be reflected in the way we express ourselves?

I suspect that we have a learning process ahead of us. As a politician, I do not presume to define the limits of media openness, but I would like to see a discussion between media representatives at this point, and at least believe that, just as politicians are expected not only to be familiar with the history and culture of the country they represent, but also to have knowledge of other cultures and countries, representatives of the media must increasingly have precisely this knowledge in order to be able to react responsibly. This requires a broadening of our world view in the literal sense. […]

I want – and I say this explicitly here – self-confident media that fulfil their public role responsibly, especially in a democracy. And I think that in the face of all these new challenges, it is time to foster an exchange between European media. This is exactly what M100 is doing, and I am very grateful that this initiative exists. Only in this way can Europe be sure of a common foundation of values and be able to assert itself with its analyses and assessments in a global world. […]