A final criterion which marked the differences in the representation of opposition between the 1970s and 80s investigates the representation of spaces in the GDR within these articles. Whilst the earlier press coverage was often limited to the capital, East Berlin, or to negatively connoted places, readers were now able to break through the imaginary border around East Berlin and gain a wider view of the country. The press coverage of the GDR during the early 1980s was marked by a widening perspective regarding the country and with it a more realistic impression of the country. Together with simply broadening the knowledge of the country’s geography, this new press interest contributed to a changing representation of the GDR. It went beyond the state authorities and a limited group of people towards a stronger focus on broader society.
In addition to articles about events in East Berlin, newspapers began to report on people and events related to forms of opposition in several other East German towns including Cottbus, Karl-Marx-Stadt, Dresden and Weimar. In 1982 and 1983, the
693
Roland Jahn is now the Federal Commissioner for the Stasi Archives in Berlin. 694
‘Westmedien in der DDR’, in Unsere Geschichte: Das Gedächtnis der Nation e.V. http://www.gedaechtnis-der-nation.de/erleben [accessed 04/08/2013].
695
British press reported several times from Dresden.696 In February 1982, The Guardian described how ‘Thousands of young East Germans took part in an unprecedented
peace demonstration.’697 Under the headline: ‘East Germany combats peace
movement in the Churches’, the newspaper reminded its readers of approximately
‘5,000 mostly young people [who] flocked to a Church peace forum in Dresden.’698
When reporting from Dresden where ‘more than 100,000 people gathered in the biggest Lutheran rally in this country’, The Times also pointed out that the East German church ‘would continue supporting young Germans who refused induction into armed
service.’699 Moreover, the article referred to young people in Eisleben and Roland Jahn
in Jena. In particular, the town of Jena moved to the centre of attention, when the British press focused on the local groups. The Guardian reported on the young campaigner, Jahn, for the first time when he was cycling through the town of Jena with a Polish flag carrying demands to support the Polish people in their opposition
activities.700 Only a few weeks later, the newspaper again reported: ‘Seven young
peace campaigners detained in the southern East German city of Jena were freed this
week.’701 Along with Jahn, The Times also reported on the ‘Women for Peace group’
and the ‘several small peace groups in East Germany’ with ‘the most notable’ in
Jena.702 Neubert and Auerbach even called the Thuringian town ‘the secret capital’ of
the peace movement in the GDR.703 The information policy of the local group which
involved contacts with Western journalists surely promoted its high profile in the British press, and the broader interest in events outside of Berlin disproves Neubert’s criticism. The historian noted that Berlin was generally much more strongly represented in the press coverage of the Western media while information about
other East German regions had only a minor news value.704 Neubert’s assessment has
to be regarded as a generalisation regarding the British press’ representation of the
696 ‘Church rally’, The Times, 11/07/1983, p. 6; ‘East block attacks on peace activists’, The Times, 17/12/1983, p. 5; ‘News in brief’, The Guardian, 19/02/1983, p. 4; ‘News in brief’, The Guardian, 23/05/1983, p. 7; ‘News in brief’, 11/06/1983, p. 9; ‘Press in permit appeal to minister’, p. 6; Boyes, ‘Polish priests jailed after protests’, p. 4; Pick, ‘Church demands amnesty’, p. 5.
697
‘Peace rally in East Germany’, The Guardian, 15/02/1982, p. 5. 698
‘East Germany combats peace movement in the churches’, p. 7. 699
‘Peace rally in East Germany draws 100,000’, p. 4. 700 ‘Press in permit appeal to minister’, p. 6.
701
Pick, ‘Church demands amnesty’, p. 5. 702
‘East block attacks on peace activists’, p. 5. 703 Neubert and Auerbach, p. 155.
704
GDR in particular during the 1980s, as it has been shown above. This demonstrates the on-going misconceptions of the press, and highlights the necessity of a more detailed analysis of the British press.
With increasing numbers of articles covering East German churches in connection with the opposition activities in the country, churches as locations which were positively perceived determined the press coverage of the 1980s. East German
churches were described as 'shelters’705 and ‘spaces’ of protest.706 Churches are not
limited to individual countries and are generally held in a high regard, making it easy for British readers to relate to them. Despite the fact that some articles mentioned
specific churches, such as the Marienkirche in East Berlin,707 the articles were not
generally limited to a specific place but instead referred to the word in a broader sense, thus implying all churches in the country. This impression was strengthened
through information such as: ‘a letter read out from pulpits throughout the country.’708
This stood in contrast to earlier articles which often reported from negatively connoted spaces such as prisons or the locked house of Robert Havemann. Overall, due to the changes in the press coverage on opposition in the GDR British readers were able to gain a much broader picture of life in the GDR beyond East Berlin. Furthermore, with the shift from depicting highly negative locations in the GDR to more positively associated ones which were not related to the East German government, a positive aspect was added to the overall image of the GDR. In addition, it also gave the impression of a growing opposition movement and thus pointing to the roots of the Wende that would come, in a way that was not seen at the time and was also not really acknowledged afterwards.
This chapter has demonstrated that articles about various kinds of opposition were an integral part of the British press coverage of the GDR. However, it is recognisable that the representation of opposition changed over time and with it the overall image of the GDR. By comparing two time periods (1976-78 and 1982-83), changes have been established on three different levels: the representation of those
705 ‘East block attacks on peace activists’, p. 5. 706
Walter Schwarz, ‘Pushing the wheel of history’, The Guardian, 15/02/1985, p. 21. 707
Walter Schwarz, ‘Peace movement to besiege Bundestag during cruise vote’, The Guardian, 07/11/1983, p. 5.
708
involved, a temporal question of when readers learned about events, and finally a changing perception of the GDR in terms of its geographical space. Moreover, the press coverage showed once more how differently individual newspapers represented events in the GDR, and how individual newspaper’s political bias influenced the presented image. The Guardian in contrast to The Times included a stronger critique of Western societies within critical articles about the GDR, which sometimes led to a relativisation of the East German government’s actions. On the other hand, The Times presented a more critical view of the East German government which can be detected in its stronger focus on human rights abuses. It has once again become obvious that
The Daily Telegraph showed the least interest in any topic connected to the GDR. The
newspaper reported only occasionally on the events in the discussed periods and tended to focus on a negative portrayal of the GDR.
The chapter has presented several examples how the working environment and the restrictions journalists had experienced in the GDR potentially influenced the news coverage. During the 1970s, the press had only limited access to adequate sources as described in Chapter One. In particular, closer contacts with common East German citizens were limited. Instead, journalists focus on prominent East German citizens and people who had left the country. As a result, the newspapers showed a restricted image of the opposition in the GDR and therefore inhibited the perception of a broader sense of dissatisfaction or even opposition at the time. The comparison between the two time periods reflects a kind of learning process by the press how to deal with and bypass East German authorities to gain information. Despite the overall restricted possibilities for foreign journalists to work in the GDR, the British press presented a more comprehensive picture of any form of opposition in the GDR than other discourses in Britain at that time. Having said that, it was only in 1989 after the fall of the Wall, that it became clear that only fragments of the actual developments in the GDR were known in the West. Consequently, the British press also presented a partial view of events. In particular, the press’ representation of a strong and broad peace movement which was apparently fully supported by the Protestant Church in the GDR has to be highlighted in this context. As previously outlined, contemporary researchers have shown that such a movement did not exist and that the East German church was also much more divided in respect to the opposition activities. However,
this particular press representation of opposition in early 1980s led to a stronger focus on East German society. Despite picturing with opposition a form of rejection of the state, the positive association with the peace movement and the East German Protestant Church added new facets to the overall image of the GDR which enabled British readers to recognise a kind of civil society in the GDR. Moreover, a stronger recognition of the East German population was possible without reference to the often negative concentration on the East German government as seen for example in Chapter Two. The broadening perception of the GDR also took place on a very different level. In the course of the changing representation of opposition, British readers were also able to see a country beyond the capital East Berlin. With the presentation of widening opposition within the country, the press also reported from different cities and towns in the GDR and thus, overcame the earlier restricted and artificial view of the GDR.