|WikiProject Germany||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Bavaria||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Journalism||(Rated Start-class)|
@Intangible: Don't you think there's an objective difference between a boulevard magazin and a quality newspaper? And where's the pov in labeling the two biggest german newspapers as "influental"? With the article Frankfurter_Allgemeine you did the same change; maybe you want to discuss this first? Leclerq 23:22, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Germans largest daily?
- What is the source for the circulation figures in the first place? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 12:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Süddeutsche Zeitung's editorial stance
The article currently describes the paper as "liberal". Does this indicate "liberal" in the sense used in Germany, as in supporting the centre-right Free Democratic Party, liberal in the European sense, or liberal in the Anglophone sense of being moderately centrist/centre-left?--Autospark (talk) 00:31, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- IMO it is liberal in the Anglophone sense and therefore the appropriate word for the context. Update: just reviewed a recent copy .. yes, as I wrote. Steipe (talk) 22:31, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
WAS SOLL DENN DIESES WOCHENENDE-KOMMENTARSPERRE-THEATER?!?
Perfide Zensur ebenso wie Veröffentlichung erst nach Sichtung bzw. Zensur, wenn einem der Kommentar nicht passt. Außerdem gibts einen Denunzier-Knopf (petzen!), der ja eigentlich wegen der Vorzensur überflüssig ist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 08:58, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Controversies on coverage of Israeli/Jewish topics
Origins and Backing of Süddeutschen Zeitung
Given the release of the Panama Papers, the connection between Süddeutschen Zeitung and the US Military is going to need to be heavily scrutinized.
Let's examine the facts of this leak to get an idea of why the history of Süddeutschen Zeitung and its connection to the US Military is so important.
The Panama Papers, we are told, were leaked anonymously by a hacker, a year ago, who claimed to want nothing in compensation. This is a suspect motive in today's ego-driven world. And the fact that not one single American official or figure is mentioned seems too coincidental to not be considered.
IF this is a targeted leak, surely it targets everyone but the United States of America. And the lack of American names in the documents, according to what we are told (we do not actually have a copy of these documents, so we cannot know if there are no US names, or if we aren't going to know if there are US names in the papers), makes it clear that if it were a targeted attack, it would have to have been perpetrated by American interests.
This is too important a question to be ignored. The history and connections to the US Military and other American interests must be revealed.