In the daily NewsThat much is certain for now, it will stay with “Good evening, ladies and gentlemen”. That although the greeting expresses a harshly criticized view of gender, in which there are only women and men. In order to “welcome everyone on board equally”, Lufthansa recently decided that it would no longer like to greet its passengers with the usual formula in future. Instead of focusing on ladies and gentlemen, a gender-neutral “Good evening” or “Welcome on board” will be used in the future.
The discussion that sparked this off, the discussion about gender in general, is torture for anyone who wants to know how to do it right as quickly as possible. Because arguments have been exchanged for years, possibilities have been suggested and flaming counter-speeches have been made. Discrimination outweighed against language abuse, exclusion of fellow citizens against exclusion of ordinary citizens. The back and forth has been going on for so long, because nobody can dictate something to everyone who speaks, not even the Duden, which is also rather undecided on the matter.
One thing is clear: in the long run, the only thing that will be usual is what most do – and most of them are currently on the move, looking left and right and wondering what to do. If you ask linguists who has the greatest influence on our language conventions, you hear: the media.
“The majority of viewers reject it,” said Petra Gerster about her gender in the “Today” news
It is understandable that anyone who is skeptical about changes observes closely how people express themselves in front of the camera, for example. 2020 started Petra Gerster (like her colleague Claus Kleber before) on the news broadcast today To gender with an audible pause in speech, for example, spoke of “pharmacists”. A decision that brought Gerster loads of angry public mail. At an appearance on the talk show Maischberger she said before retiring in May: “The majority of viewers are against it.”
This is not only the feeling of Petra Gerster, but also the result of a survey by Infratest Dimap from the spring. 65 percent stated that they rejected internal Is, gender asterisks or passivations (like listening instead of listeners) in the press, radio, television and at public events. Compared to the previous year, the rejection has even increased; in 2020, 56 percent rejected gender-neutral language in the same survey.
With majorities, however, you reach limits on the subject, after all, gender is about making linguistic minorities visible. And of course there are good reasons for really addressing all parts of the audience in the media, i.e. men, women and people who do not want to be understood as women, not as men. But neither all groups feel addressed by gendered variants nor by the generic masculine term. How should the public service media, which are most strongly committed to the claim to mean everyone, deal with the linguistic predicament?
If you ask around there, it means that there is a lot of movement in the topic, that the attitudes in editorial offices and in the target groups are fluid, that in the future anything will actually be possible when it comes to gender. The ZDF offers a correspondingly contemporary solution for the fluid situation. The station “wants to communicate in a non-discriminatory manner and also pays attention to how society and language change,” it says there. There is no requirement to gender in ZDF broadcasts, the editorial team is free to do so. Petra Gerster’s successor Jana Pareigis and Claus Kleber are also gendering with a break in the news. Jan Böhmermann occasionally switches to a generic feminine in his program, “Policewomen”, he says, including the men. In short: everyone can do what they want.
In the future, the BR will not use gender asterisks, the audience was often irritated
In the federally organized ARD it is a little more complicated. The state broadcasters and formats deal with the topic differently. In the daily News there are no gender breaks to be heard, while Anne Will, for example, has been changing for a long time. Last week, the BR persuaded the majority of the audience to ban the audible or visible gender asterisk from its program. In an internal mail that the SZ has received, it is stated that the (spoken) gender star will be dispensed with “in writing as well as verbally” because the pause in speaking would often have irritated the audience. When making the decision, orientate yourself to the Society for German Language, which does not consider the gender star to be suitable – because it does not conform to the rules of German grammar or to those of spelling.
The BR makes exceptions for special target groups and youth offers, such as pulse, or the Instagram format News WG, and content from other state broadcasters that may gender without interference is also being taken over. “The management of the BR is aware of the sensitivity of the topic,” it concluded.
The radio station Fritz from RBB, on the other hand, announced a year ago that it would be changing its news. Program director Karen Schmied says that it caused “a lot of reactions, especially emotional ones”. The criticism, however, came from people “who deal with the topic because of their profession or out of interest and who were above Fritz’s target group in terms of age.” Approval had come from the target group, i.e. from young people and from the queer community.
At SWR you use “all the possibilities that gender-sensitive language offers”
The ratio between approval and criticism was around 50/50, the on-air start in September 2020 was much quieter. “After the test phase of three months, we decided to continue using the asterisk audibly in the Fritz-Nachrichten and to use the colon on the social media channels.” This year there were hardly any listeners’ emails on the subject.
At Deutschlandradio, efforts are also made to use gender-sensitive language; a handout from February 2019, for example, suggests that instead of speaking of members of parliament, saying “nobody” instead of “none”. Intendant Stefan Raue does not want dogmatic rules, but rather “desire and creativity in formulating”.
The SWR has also opted for a position that is as conciliatory as possible. In order not to exclude anyone and still formulate it in an appropriately concise and understandable manner, use “all the options that gender-sensitive language offers”. So sometimes the female and male form, sometimes the gender star or a gender-neutral term. However, one does not want to “lecture anyone or complicate formulations, but rather deal relaxed with the linguistic possibilities so that as many people as possible feel addressed by the topics”.
The spoken version of the gender star is still cautious, but it also receives critical feedback “that we are committed to society as a whole, and therefore to all genders, and must therefore also use the spoken gender star.” According to the SWR, it is “very difficult, if not impossible, to do justice to all interests at this point, because everyone has a personal feeling about this question”.
The situation shows that the public broadcasters are indifferent to the language and their audience. In a world where many have a say, it is harder to agree on a language. A large number of regulations exist side by side. Despite all the complexity, confusion and irritation, this also means: Here we experiment, react, discard, try again. And that’s good news for everyone, everyone, for everyone.