Talk:Tagesschau (German TV programme)

Germany High‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Capitalisation

As far as I can tell, "Tagesschau" is capitalised, both in Germand and English, except in the domain name tagesschau.de. User:ThomasK disagrees, citing the German wikipedia (which capitalises it) and http://tagesschau.de (which capitalises it in the page title).

I do not see any evidence at all for the spelling tagesschau, and I'm going to revert to the capitalised spelling.

Prumpf 19:25, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Look to tagesschau.de . I corrected the article. The ARD tagesschau on the internet and on TV is not capitalised. --ThomasK 05:10, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

All German nouns, whether common or proper, are capitalised. "Tagesschau" is a German noun. Therefore... - RTB

Lower-case initial tagesschau and tagesthemen are the style, or branding, of these programmes -- as used in on-screen idents and on the programmes' own websites. That said, they could change back to Tagesschau and Tagesthemen as soon as the next graphic designer is appointed to the news department and decides on another makeover; the lower-case forms (logos) don't have to be (and, in my view, ought not to be) used in other, outside references to them. Just look at ARD's own online schedules, where they are shown as Tagesschau and Tagesthemen. -- Picapica 12:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hard coded scripts

"Today, the 8pm bulletin remains the only flagship news programme on German television where newsreaders read stories directly from a hard copy of the script. " That's not true and hasn't been for a long time. All presenters read from the autocue, the scripts are only for backup. Some presenters (e.g. Susanne Daubner) like the script better, so you'll see here eyes wander between camera and script a lot. Jan Hofer on the other hand only reads the autocue. --91.16.188.134 (talk) 16:55, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

translation

IMHO the translation into english is wrong. Literally the term today show means in german "Heute Schau" which is very similar to a comedy show on the second german television (heute show). The correct translation of tagesschau must be something like "days show". (Tag = day) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.18.161.134 (talk) 18:24, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The etymology of "Tagesschau" is given correctly: There was the "Wochenschau" running in cinemas before. The "Tagesschau", thus, is a kind of "Wochenschau" on a daily basis. As you might note here, "Wochenschau" is translated as "Weekly Newsreel". The connection is obvious that "Tagesschau" is to mean "Daily Newsreel", and to be honest, that's what I would put in the article. As it is, I'm changing the article to read "Day's Review", as it is close enough to both literal and intended meaning. -- DevSolar (talk) 11:49, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TV prime time in Germany

The prime time movie on German TV always starts at 20:15 - right after the Tagesschau. Interestingly this is not only true for ARD and associated stations, but also for all other channels. The show is that significant.

Christian — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.245.88.29 (talk) 10:40, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is mentioned in the article. The history behind that is that the Tagesschau already existed for ten years before the second German TV channel (ZDF) was added, and a whooping 32 years before the private channels entered the scene. There simply was no way around the 20:00 to 20:15 time slot being reserved for prime news. To this day, the few other stations with an own news format (SAT.1, RTL II, ...) also use that time slot for it. The only noteable exception is the ZDF with its "heute" ("today") format. -- DevSolar (talk) 12:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Even the Deutscher Fernsehfunk moved its main news programme from 20:00 to 19:30 in order not to complete directly with Tagesschau. 2.127.208.169 (talk) 18:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unrelated images and comments

The online version of the Tagesschau is notorious for putting unrelated and even fake images in their articles, mostly when it's about foreign countries since no one would notice anyway, like this image with stacks of newspapers: http://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/journalismus-china-101.html. One is about "Trump", one about the Soviet union releasing Jiang Jingguo to China, and another one about Jiang Jieshi's plans of retaking China. Clearly, these events don't belong to the same era. Other images aren't even taken in the country the articles talk about. Another fact is that there is supposed to be a comment section there, but this function is not consistently available.

Sometimes they think that the articles are too controversial, that discussions would get too heated. Even when the function is on, moderators have to read the comments first until they get published. Some neutral comments don't pass, but some hate comments do. It's very arbitrary. Comments sections also randomly close apparently due to moderators being overwhelmed by the number of comments. So if you write a comment and the comment section closes just minutes after you have already sent your comment, your entry will likely be lost in the "ocean" of comments. This isn't even a very used comment section, articles rarely have over 100 comments, but moderators just randomly decide when to relieve themselves of one discussion while being very active another one. Sometimes comments sections do reopen (provided it's still during the eight hours after the article has been published, provided the article can be commented at all), but your comment is definitely lost.

Sometimes, you point out some typos, content mistakes or wrong pictures, they will send you a private mail to thank you. Your comment doesn't get published, but they secretly fixed whatever was wrong, pretending it had been alright all along. However, no one can fix the awful style of those articles. Arguments are often structured wrongly and don't make sense so that a neutral-minded would not be able to tell how one point leads to a totally ridiculous conclusion. This should be somehow mentionend in the section "Media studies and criticism". Before you discard this as POV, please follow the Tagesschau's news coverage and comment sections, maybe use a translator to get a gist of what gets published. If you have some knowledge of German, sign up with a throwaway address and see how things work there. Of course, no official sources will ever talk about this, but that doesn't mean these problems don't exist. Everyone would be totally fine if there wasn't a comment section at all, but randomly selecting comments to depict an overall wrong public reaction is just distasteful. There is page where people publish suppressed comments (it's just copy and paste because unpublished comments still stay in your private message box) and many of them aren't even provocative. As said above, it's likely comments get lost due to the moderators' poor handling of the situation or they just don't like your opinions. There is really no swearing or other inappropriate content like on YouTube in this comments: https://tageszensur.blogger.de/. --92.74.29.137 (talk) 04:50, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]