Podcast: Warum die Gesellschaft empfänglich für eine mediale "Aufgeregtheit" ist | Lanz & Precht

about four, and that is a great advance. The government is considering introducing a three-child policy, because these four children, of course, are still too many. Here we face the problem, the biggest one. A population is more dangerous if it continues to grow. Yes, yes, and then, of course, three or four children are still too many, which means, of course, a total catastrophism that will last forever, of course it works correctly, education. prosperity, especially women's education, changes in retirement provisions, etc., are very, very good means to achieve this. The population isn't exactly that strong and that's completely true, but it's reaching a lot more adults, it's clear, but, but, um. the interesting connection with which, for example, the country you like least or Niger is looked at depending on which one you want to really pronounce one of the first countries on this planet nowhere do women have more children because education is practically unattainable because people actually talked about recently as an example of where there is currently a gigantic humanitarian catastrophe, a famine catastrophe, among other things, that is exactly why it might actually be the case that you are allowed.

I can't imagine that these curves are always so smooth, so it's not that the conditions of the planet are improving year after year, but it could be purely theoretical that I am entering a multi-year phase where there is no significant improvement or not. No deterioration occurs, yes, the long-term trend that works in the Pinker sense or in the Rossling sense but it does not mean that these curves have dents and there is no mathematical law that determines that this will continue the same as in the last ones. decades. This goes exactly to my other point. Richard's point about the story is interesting, but we live in a world where we have unlimited access to information and the interesting thing is that people also have a lot of journalists, for example, the people who actually have access to the latest information they don't see the world through The eyes of Hans Rosling, but they see the world through the eyes of catastrophism with these apocalyptic scenarios, so to speak, they always describe the problem and make it as dramatic as possible so that it is there, then you quickly access the Internet. so that you click yes, so that in this economy attention at your, um, at your expense, any ideas or suggestions again come out journalism, attention, I was just thinking about yes, describing the problem is completely correct when describing the problem of climate change You are absolutely right, but the question is what conclusions are drawn from it and, for example, in the case of Niger, because you see, we see, but we know what we really have to do and we must get to work.

By the way, Roßling has a really interesting thesis and I'm interested in his opinion. Richard Roßling says that this is what happens, that we are so receptive to this scaremongering and all this enthusiasm that has now, of course, become an incredibly powerful tool with the Internet. He says that it has nothing to do with the evil of the media and propaganda with fake news and not even with false or alternative facts, says that it is really interesting to have the thesis that it has something to do with the way our brain works. We like to be on the wrong path, so I think that's it.

It's not a question of this or that because our brain works the way that determines things like the new yes or the monstrous trigger particularly strong emotions in us, which is why the media works the way it works. I would never accuse the media of being malicious and that was probably done by a very kind person who wrote that and just misunderstood it, but I actually kind of understand his motivation. to separate the honor from him, so to speak. He probably comes from Brandenburg itself and somehow I would have had the feeling that he would have made some kind of hostile comment about it and I can only say that it was exactly the opposite.

I think again that the beloved regions of Brandenburg, far from Berlin, are a treasure and are not primarily a treasure for future industrial development, but also with regard to ecological policy as nature reserves and I think I have sold Brandenburg. very short in terms of tourism, but you know, that was the statement and that has nothing to do with praising that. So it has to do with love with yes, you are a Brandenburg, maybe a critical lover towards Brandenburg but you have love but you I know where it's interesting from, but Richard, I always told you that before, I thought they would all go to the CDU.

For example, don't even accuse the man of cheap populism, who now has rules in North Korea and tweets violently and talks about an insufferable know-it-all even though I didn't understand the context. In any case, I would not claim noble reasons for tweeting. I'm just saying what I mean is from the politician's point of view, when you say it is. It's actually good news if there are suddenly fewer human lives and suddenly more space for wolves. It is also very important from a politician's point of view, it is not good news. You can do that with the wolves, don't do politics, so you can, but you. you can't shape anything yes, you can shape a little, you can't shape anything anyway, so the leader of the first CDU parliamentary group, the CDU has 15% of the votes in Brandenburg and they don't get less than 300,000 votes. more spotted eagles in Brandenburg as a CDU voter, so I wouldn't believe you have this kind of big populism like you're doing now, no, that's a really bad attack on the CDU, think about how good it actually is, Mr Rettmann, although you say that there are fewer CDU voters than Golden Eagles, yes, in three eagles, sorry, they shout, eagles in Brandenburg, no, the example is of course an example, so I must say that the Spotted eagles are very rare.

I'm happy to admit it. but more common vultures than CD I have a different theory. I think that the common vultures and the cries Adler and Brandenburg and Mr. Rettmann and you are actually not that far from each other, in reality you all only want the best in Brandenburg and even North Korea only wants the best for Brandenburg and In fact, what we are discussing here is a good example of how to do it. So to speak, the mechanisms of this attention economy, the keyword also scaremongering, etc., how you can take that and use it. and if they sat at a table now and talked to each other, I think it would be a constructive and good conversation, yes, it is very possible that it would be.

If everyone is united by the love of Brandenburg, We will also find a common level. I think we should do it now, but just for ourselves. We should sell stickers in the zdf Brandenburg Lover store. I think this would be in high demand if it were still possible to do it with Hans Rosling and others. , I mean, you are someone who deals a lot with the human brain. Fortunately, you also use it very intensely and there really is something in this brain, but you want to agree that this is how we are built. As human beings, we are so receptive to everything that is steep, alarmist theses, like Revelation and the reason we watch Roland Emmerich movies, so I think we are not being kind here, yes.

So each jacket is different. I'm just thinking about my father, yes he avoids everything that is new and monstrous, which means that obviously there are brains that work exactly the other way around and I have to say personally that I don't watch Emmerich movies, so I have seen the Day of Independence a long time ago when it came out, yes, and now it was bad and since then I gave a lot of leeway to Emmerich's films, so I think we have to be careful, so that every brain still works a little. differently, but of course it's true that you could also do that in an evolutionary way.

Of course, there are things that are new in the savannah, there was little new, we were not overstimulated with constant novelties, if anything. new, of course it was something special and of course it will have a great influence on the brain. An animal brain has to realize that it adapts to something new and has to pay attention to the new, the unexpected and the threatening. and demonstrative so that you can survive, with us it naturally entered into such a fun mode that it no longer serves to survive, but serves. In reality, it is exactly a drug-like sensation and the opposite would be to bring yourself. come back down at some point with meditation and concentration, etc. - Lessing's phrase that I quote so often - he who does not lose his understanding of certain things has nothing to lose with my addition.

Who loses his mind in everything, really not really and I mean we live in a world where we search for our minds above all, really, so you might like to talk about Brandenburg and the Serengeti cables, but only in black and so serious, being constantly worried about everything to In political debates, the effort to accuse your political opponent of bad intentions, in the same way that you assume that people who have opinions different from yours are completely stupid or brutally cynical, etc. ., has acquired a scope and unfortunately also today. -so-called quality media and which emerged through the Twitter series, so I still think that the influence of tweets on public discourse is completely underestimated.

Yes, yes, unfortunately I think so and the strange thing is that yes. A few massively satisfied comments on Twitter are enough. have gigantic social consequences at this time and without abuse, it is known to lose its appeal and that is why it is widely used. I have been through catastrophes, very few of them have actually happened. Yes, that's what I've really been through. I mean, I think you're afraid of a lot more things in your life than this device B opening up at the end, but it's also a matter of mindset, yes, but again No, you just said something interesting, Richard.

You just said that the antidote would be meditation. No, I would always say that the antidote is research. Now, when it comes to our profession, for example, think about how often we have had it in recent years. that the lungs of the planet are basically dying, that the Amazon is now falling apart and the feeling that has always arisen and there are so many apocalyptic reports of this type until today when there is a fire in the Amazon again, so it seems that Everyone We'll be out of breath soon because of this. There is no more oxygen in the world and the truth is not true because the Amazon needs a large part of this oxygen that it produces itself for cellular respiration, plants also need it, so really, what?

What I mean is that it's actually wrong to say completely wrong and it's alarmist to say that the world's lungs are dying now. Completely wrong, so I personally think when I think of the Amazon, not first and foremost the climate, but I think in all the endangered animals that Western science hasn't even discovered yet, so one and you use the In principle, yes, so all the insects and so on that maybe have wonderful enzymes that can be used for great advances in cancer research , that's a practical aspect, but for me what is much stronger is this fascination with all these creatures that have been on this planet for millions and millions of years.

The planets live and we just slaughter a little bit of land and for a few dollars more and so on as if the planet belonged only to us and my fearful fascination with nature is always shaken to its core. To me, deforestation of the Amazon for short-term profit is something of a secular blasphemy. As you know, I'm not a person who believes that deeply in a human God, but I think it's a bicycle in nature and that's where it's found. In the end, the most crucial question of all is to what extent 90-8050 percent or whatever for climate change your metaphor is used, which doesn't exactly mean it's true, but just completely embraced. uncritically, that's my point, of course, that's a tragedy not a question, journalist, something like that after Richard, we all use it all the time, we can investigate, no, but it's good until the end, Richard, I mean , these There are very fundamental connections, I have winter, ecosystem scientists at the University of Oxford, I will quote that Amazon plants need about 60% of the oxygen during cellular respiration for their energy supply, and the microbes that decompose biomass of the tropical jungle. consumes the remaining 40% and then says that it is interesting from a practical point of view, the net contribution of the Amazon ecosystem, not just the plants, to oxygen, look at the world at practically 0 the only self-preservation of the system. and that is not the opinion of one expert among many other scientists but of course there are many others at the same level, there are also people working on it and in many other universities in addition to Netzt, one of the main authors of the global climate report. , he cited as nonsense that the Amazon is a major source of our oxygen and then says that it produces a gigantic amount of oxygen but consumes equally large amounts and so on,exactly the same areas but not in the Amazon on a large scale.

CO2 yes, but as I said it is and it produces oxygen in return, so to speak, but this oxygen but the images are not just about the production of oxygen, I am interested in these headlines that you had on this topic The fact that Actually, this It is a great self-sustaining system worth preserving, but put it next to the television reports, next to the newspaper articles, next to the images you have seen of it in recent years and decades, it is always apocalypse. tomorrow we will practically run out of air and that's how this connection is just not right and that's what I mean by adamism, you know what I mean, I know you always mean the end, Richard, very briefly, what does this mean? alarmism?

Do I already take this in politics, for example? This is really a problem for me as a founder, I also commented on it some time ago in the Augsburger Allgem

eine

, who said that more and more politicians are content with simply. naming problems instead of solving them and that he said a totally good phrase that is convenient, that attracts attention. But it's also a bit poor, you know, I don't think it's a problem, I think most politicians don't trust me. with the solution because the moment you actively approach something, you make enemies, and if you step on someone's toes, you may already make enemies.

In your own party, the political opponent not only sees it, but takes advantage of it and denigrates you. , but you also encounter resistance in your own party. You realize that today the best way to get ahead in a match is not to change too much, so you can do it using the example of Angela Merkel, which is what you do. As I mentioned before, I would like to say that when she was in power, I came out very often and criticized her harshly. Germany may have done quite well, but in the end, of course, we said that back then and I was You are not the only one who has always said that Germany ruins its future with harmonization that addresses all the big problems.

They have been addressed halfway or very little. As far as an active climate policy is concerned, something could have been done. much more than during Merkel's time, but that is precisely when you are most successful in politics when you make as few enemies as possible and you make as few enemies as possible if you really change little, so, Richard, I think it's an exciting moment. topic and also deal with it and that's the big mystery for me in a way about this topic about this phenomenon that this this this this this this game with fear, this duration of emotion, I mean, we just have access to information like never before before we could really know the history of humanity better and yet we indulge in this dark, black vision of the world and we are so united in this false darkness that we really have the feeling that nothing is happening at all, it is becoming getting worse and worse than us and getting more and more terrible if you look closer you will notice that fortunately it is also improving in many places yes 50 million issue obsolete society I think that is simply what we have such a high average age older people have more afraid Do you think I should?

I mean, that's the darkness of the world at the entrance to the tunnel, so the closer you get to death, the darker the look becomes. It doesn't really make sense, so I want to say that there are very optimistic older people. People, that's true. but there are also many people my age who have the feeling that most things were better before, yes, but because they no longer see themselves in a way of life and why they can't find themselves there again because they are no longer there. It is no longer part of their attitude towards life, why are they not because they are too old to repeat the mistakes of the past and so on, they no longer have the desire and because this naivety has been lost and so on and so on and I think that this has to be see with the average age I would be interested in conducting research that would simply be a correlation between the average age of a population and the optimism of a country and the second is large countries, small countries because I recently met someone in Switzerland who wrote about the charm of small countries in a book and said: In other words, everything is better in small countries and I'm pretty sure that residents of small countries are more optimistic about the future.

These two correlations must be examined. In the end, how black you see the world depends on the size of the country and its age, the average procedure, yes, the thing about small countries is interesting. My theory would be that there are a few small countries. Can things be changed more quickly? To somehow change the direction of a large oil tanker like Germany is much more difficult, but I will briefly repeat at the end: in 2016 five million small children died. children under five simply died. That is sad and bad and it is a great tragedy all over the world, all over the world exactly, I have to see it with my own eyes in Africa.

That's terrible, you don't want to experience that. , but that is another way of seeing the world. In 1990 more than 11 million people died. I just want to say that five million is still a big tragedy, but I still can't help it. I would never have thought of those things. obviously they have improved and 80% of children around the world are now vaccinated and it is not always just the catastrophe that happens, you could imagine that there are public news programs where they say that we have to have at least as much good news as the that there is bad news, so a kind of quota, no, or how about one before the Tagesschau report of five to ten minutes on the things that have just gone better in the world, the things that have gone well today, the things that things have gone well today, things are now better than before, yes, where you hear the news about catastrophes in Tagesschau, in fact I think people are in favor of it.

I would be interested if you told us what has gone well today, for example, a news item that is completely lost at the moment, you are changing, Annalena Baerbock, I think she was the one who was afraid of the riots and social uprisings in this last year. If I still have it. I haven't seen it, I'll say it now. , I don't know what's wrong with you and the second thing is that both of you already said that you're not coming, maybe that's how it was, the gasoline shortage hasn't happened, yes, and the merger has also caused the collapse of the German industry, It hasn't happened yet.

I just want to say that good stories like this should be told to us much more often, maybe we should make a series with many surprisingly good stories about the state of the world or Germany just for once or Germany that's really good and it's crazy that Germany do it, we really want to make three episodes about it, there is a lot to tell, yes, Brandenburg for example, in this sense, Richard, thank you, goodbye production of m hoch 2 and Popstars at OMR on behalf of ZDF