• First page (1 page)
• Topic of the day (1 page)
• 3rd page (1 page)
• Domestic Politics (1 page)
• “Landespolitik”  (politics on the state level – here: Baden Württemberg )
• Foreign policy (1 page)
• Glossy news from around the world (2 pages)
• Letters (1 page)

• Economy (7 pages)

• Stuttgart (5 pages)
• Stuttgart Region (1 page)
• Baden Württemberg (2 pages)
• Letters/Stuttgart (1 page)
• Discoveries (1 page)
• Reportage/ feature (1 page)

• Culture (2 pages)
• Film (1 page)
• Media (1 page)
• Agenda (1 page)
• Sport (3 pages)

Hmm, ok it is a typical newspaper structure baring in mind the local/regional approach. So what happens with important EU news? If there is a EU summit – topic of the day or first page maybe, the rest of EU news can sometimes be found in the economy or foreign policy (which should be called “international”…) sections. The question I have is the following:

Why not include a daily EU politics page in the first part of the paper?

One page every day (or at least every other day)? It could be the perfect newspaper structure looking at local-regional-national-European-International dimensions! Considering how much is decided on a EU level I find it shocking that newspapers do not report regularly about the EU. And with ‘regularly’ I mean daily – not only during EU summits and EP plenary sessions! And only a change in the structure of the newspaper can introduce a constant reporting. Nowadays, the media happily neglects day to day EU politics. ( Did I hear “fourth power” somewhere?)

I know there is a whole issue whether regional newspapers can afford a journalist based in Brussels? Then again, most press conferences are streamed online, most documents can be found online,  EU institutions are responsive to phone calls and emails. And there are a lot of freelance journalists in Brussels that are desperate for jobs… And let’s not forget: EU funding, EU projects and EU policies have a regional dimension. Only if there is a constant flow of EU news, people become aware of what is going on in the EU institutions. An EU page would also “force” journalists to come up with stories more regularly. There would also be a forum for the local MEPs to be present in the public debate. If you (as a newspaper editor) want to change something and get EU news in the paper there are many different possibilities!

I have written about the EU ignorance of newspaper editors before and I will keep an eye on it.  But as long as regional newspapers like the Stuttgarter Zeitung refuse to include the EU in the structure of the paper nothing will change regarding knowledge and ignorance of citizens (and journalists). The relaunch of the StZ is therefore a missed opportunity to address this problem. (Well, the main problem is probably that this was not even an issue when they thought about the relaunch…)

I would be interested whether there are newspapers with a regular “EU page”? (not a ‘Europe page’ with random stories from different European countries!) Comments are open…

At a panel with the ‘traditional’ media the question came up whether established media cover EU affairs in-depth enough? The question was primarily directed to the chief editor of De Standaard, one of the biggest Belgian newspapers (based in Brussels) but with quite a poor record of EU coverage and with only one (!) journalist covering the EU.

So what did Peter Vandermeersch, chief editor of  De Standaard answer? Basically he avoided answering the question (“don’t think we have a poor record…hahaha”) and instead compared the EU with the ‘obscure’ topic of Latvian poems claiming that an editor has to make editorial decisions and needs to listen to the customers (not readers or citizens!) – And he continues: “Latvian poems can be beautiful but are not relevant…”

In that moment Hans Laroes, head of news and editor in chief of NOS Niewus, one of the Dutch public broadcasters, jumped in to ‘help’ his colleague by saying that “the media does not like free trips by the EU”.. obviously a comment that neither answers the question nor shows a huge deal of professionalism.

So, first of all, both journalists clearly fail to understand the significance of the EU. Furthermore it is questionable if such an arrogant and ignorant behavior towards the EU can be justified with any journalistic ethos.

At the same time I am wondering whether this attitude is widespread among editors of newpapers/broadcasters? If it is a common thing it is hardly surprising that we are faced with poor EU reporting and a lack of public debate/knowledge about the EU!